It’s begun to get all exciting and hectic over at dLiberation, so what have you missed if you’re not popping over there already?
First, academics being academics, a bit of a fight’s broken out, with the chaps behind deliberative polling – James Fishkin of Stanford and Robert Luskin of the University of Texas – coming back to defend themselves in vehemnet style: part 1 and part 2. More to follow soon – but it’s an interesting debate, and one that goes to the heart of the matter – if you claim a scientific basis for your methods, you need to defend them to scientific standards.
There’s also an interesting defence of EU democracy from Richard Corbett MEP, which makes a good case for the democratic deficit being a myth.
Plus a quick look from me at Margot Wallstrom’s latest calls for a wide-ranging debate on the future of the EU which will apparently have “no preconditions, no taboos”.
Then there’s a nice piece from Giles Merritt of the Friends of Europe on the need for more euroscepticism, with some well-considered arguments that struck quite a chord with me. In fact, it looks like there could well be a long-needed shift towards introspection and sensible, constructive criticism coming in to some sections of the pro-EU community. Which can only be a good thing. I hope.
Finally, for those who still aren’t too sure what deliberative democracy is all about, the first in a series of posts explaining the thing from Dennis Thompson of Harvard and Amy Guttman of the University of Pennsylvania.
More coming soon – including, to redress the balance a bit – something from Nigel Farage, leader of UKIP and co-chair of the eurosceptic Independence and Democracy Group in the European Parliament.