Abstract
On most accounts of global democracy, human rights are ascribed a central function. Still, their conceptual role in global democracy is often unclear. Two recent attempts to remedy this deficiency have been made by James Bohman and Michael Goodhart. What is interesting about their proposals is that they make the case that under the present circumstances of politics, global democracy is best conceptualized in terms of human rights. Although the article is sympathetic to this ‘human rights approach’, it defends the thesis that human rights are not enough for global democracy. It argues that insofar as we hold on to the general idea of democracy as a normative ideal of self-determination (self-rule) that is, of people determining their own lives and ruling over themselves, the concept of democracy accommodates two necessary conditions, namely, political bindingness and political equality. Further, it argues that neither Bohman's nor Goodhart's accounts fulfills these conditions and that one explanation for this could be traced to a lack of clarity concerning the distinction between democracy as normative ideal and democracy as decision method or rules (for example, institutions, laws and norms) for regulating social interactions. This ambiguity has implications for both Goodhart and Bohman. In Goodhart's work it manifests itself as a vagueness concerning the difference between political agency and democratic agency; in Bohman's work it becomes unclear whether he contributes a normative democratic theory or a theory of democratization. Although this article develops both a conceptual and a normative argument against their proposals, the aim is not to find fault with them but to point to questions that are in need of further elaboration to make them more convincing.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
For insightful thoughts on different conceptions of equality in democracy, see Christiano (1996).
It is surprising how little attention Goodhart pays to international law, considering the burden that human rights are supposed to carry in achieving global democracy. On this point, see Burchill (2008, p. 18).
References
Archibugi, D. (2002) Demos and cosmopolis. New Left Review 13: 24–38.
Arrhenius, G. (2005) The boundary problem in democratic theory. In: F. Tersman (ed.), Democracy Unbound. Stockholm: Philosophy Department Stockholm University.
Bohman, J. (2007) Democracy across Borders: From Dêmos to Dêmoi. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bohman, J. (2010) A response to my critics: Democracy across borders. Ethics & Global Politics 3 (1): 71–84.
Buchanan, A. (2004) Justice, Legitimacy, and Self-Determination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burchill, R. (2008) Moving beyond markets and minimalism: Democracy in the Era of globalization. Human Rights & Human Welfare 8: 17–30.
Christiano, T. (1996) The Rule of the Many. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Christiano, T. (2008) ‘Authority’. in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/authority/, accessed 2 November 2009.
Dryzek, J. (2006) Deliberative Global Politics: Discourse and Democracy in a Divided World. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Dworkin, R. (1986) Law's Empire. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press.
Erman, E. (2008) On Goodhart's global democracy: A critique. Ethics & International Affairs 22 (4).
Goodhart, M. (2005) Democracy as Human Rights: Freedom and Equality in the Age of Globalization. London: Routledge.
Goodhart, M. (2008) Human rights and global democracy. Ethics & International Affairs 22 (4): 395–420.
Goodin, R. (2004) Democracy, justice and impartiality. In: K. Dowding, R. Goodin and C. Pateman (eds.), Justice and Democracy: Essays for Brian Barry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goodin, R. and List, C. (2006) A conditional defense of plurality rule: Generalizing May's theorem in a restricted informational environment. American Journal of Political Science 50 (4): 940–949.
Habermas, J. (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, Translated by W. Rehg. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Held, D. (1995) Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. California: Stanford University Press.
Held, D. (2002) Law of states, law of peoples: Three models of sovereignty. Legal Theory 8 (1): 1–44.
Lafont, C. (2010) Can democracy go global? Ethics & Global Politics 3 (1): 13–19.
Rawls, J. (1971) A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Schumpeter, J. (1950) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
Walker, R. (2010) Democratic theory and the present/absent International. Ethics & Global Politics 3 (1): 21–36.
Acknowledgements
I thank Maeve Cooke, Bob Goodin, Chandran Kukathas, Mathias Koenig-Archibugi, Michael Saward, Iseult Honohan and Niklas Möller for constructive comments on earlier drafts of this article. I also thank David Held for inviting me as a visiting fellow at LSE Global Governance during the winter and spring of 2010. Moreover, I have benefited a lot from good discussions with the participants of the LSE Political theory workshop (16 February 2010) and the seminar at UCD School of Politics and International Relations (26 February 2010). Thanks also to the editors and anonymous reviewers of this journal as well as to Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (RJ) for financing my Pro Futura Fellowship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Erman, E. Human rights do not make global democracy. Contemp Polit Theory 10, 463–481 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/cpt.2010.36
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/cpt.2010.36