In this relatively concise, highly readable book, John Dryzek sets out on a rather ambitious task. “One of my goals in this book is to show that an approach to democracy emphasizing dispersed and competent control over the engagement of discourses in international public spheres is feasible and attractive. I will try to show that transnational discursive democracy can address all the conflicts I have outlined in this chapter including the very hardest cases that a divided world presents: terrorism and counter-terror, the alleged clash of civilizations and violent conflict in divided societies” (26). Dryzek then proceeds to take on a variety of issues, including market liberalism, globalization, anti-corporate globalization, realism, human rights, counter-terrorism, neoconservatism, industrialism, sustainable development and discourses of identity with the objective of demonstrating that transnational deliberative democracy can contribute to a resolution of the problems the world faces. Along the way the reader is treated to a number of interesting observations and arguments. Dryzek provides a very interesting discussion of the discourses surrounding the “war on terror,” including such things as the mix of market and military metaphors, the difficulty if near impossibility of segmenting audiences given globalization's ability to make every statement an instantaneous YouTube moment, as well as the fact that many have an interest in playing up the threat, making the “discursive presence more consequential” (75). In each of the substantive areas, the author seeks to demonstrate the manner in which discourses have defined, reinforced and, in some instances, transformed political practice. He points out, “Deliberative global politics can be found in two sorts of places. The first consists of formal negotiations; … a second strand … looks to the potential for diffuse communication in the public sphere that generates public opinion that can in turn exercise political influence” (27). Critical to the argument is the idea that discourse plays a constitutive role in defining identities and nations. Thus, it is at the level of discourse that one must attempt to generate change, as he writes, “if discourses underlie the problem, they can also underlie the solution” (53).
In his review of different substantive areas, Dryzek argues that the historical pattern of discursive engagement suggests a move from a hegemonic discourse to a contestation among different discourses. The transition is not always smooth or easy, but the potential for such a transformation exists given even the most oppressive leader's interest in some degree of legitimacy. “Most agents of disruption, be they masters of the military-industrial complex or Third World dictators, on closer inspection reveal at least some of the sensitivity to collective opinion and the sanctions it can motivate; however much they would like to evade such constraint … these operations are now co-ordinated in large part by the discourse they share. And if this is so, then part of the response to them must operate at the discourse level” (92–93). In the process of transforming discourses, Dryzek's analysis calls attention to the important role that individuals and civil society actors have played in generating alternative discourses that challenge hegemonic ones. He also describes how these discursive contestations can create opportunities and support for political practices that challenge the more conflictual patterns of behaviour that have been so prominent in many areas of global politics. The text also presents an interesting critique of many existing practices to shape global governance, such as multilateralism. He cautions against a highly institutionalized and constitutional form of multilateralism, noting that it “sits uneasily in a world where multiple and contested discourses are important” (145). “Multilateralists should, then, bear in mind the degree to which the world features multiple contested discourses where politics (especially democratic politics) is in large matter a question of their engagement. If this is ignored, multilateralism risk sapping the discursive and democratic energy of international political life” (147).
In making the case for deliberative democracy at the global level, Dryzek maintains that the international/transnational realm is one in which discursive democracy plays a larger role given the higher levels of contestation that exist and the limited role for more institutionalized forms of power. At the same time, it is a place that is increasingly important both for defining identity and for rendering practices that affect individual lives. The interest in democracy at the global level has been encouraged by the increasingly consequential aspects of decisions at the global level, and democratic processes are one means of providing legitimacy for global governance. For Dryzek, it is also important to distinguish discursive democracy from its alternatives, such as neoconservative and cosmopolitan democracy. For Dryzek deliberative democracy requires that communication be “first, capable of inducing reflection, second, non-coercive, and third, capable of linking the particular experience of an individual or group with some more general point or principle” (52).
While some readers will, no doubt, remain skeptical of the potential for deliberative democracy to be realized, let alone of its ability to transform the course of global politics, Dryzek's discussion provides an interesting perspective from which to view the potential for change in global politics.
