Dialogic Deliberative Democracy

Some of the most meaningful and memorable experiences I have are when I am interacting with another person and we are communicating in such a way that we mutually discover something unique about the other person that can lead to realizations of aspects of ourselves. I will argue that interactions like this, what I call “dialogue,” are necessary for a more genuine democracy. I will use a course called the Intergroup Dialogue Program to illustrate how this can happen and suggest what habits individuals can form to promote greater democracy.
First, I will show that democracy is best thought of as a process rather than some static ideal. By thinking of it in this way, we can better assess potential changes to our governments and societies by looking at the changes individually and see whether each will make our government and societies more democratic. I will also show that some level of deliberation is one of the dimensions of change necessary to make for a more democratic government because it better serves the self-interest of everyone. Third, I argue that only certain forms of deliberation are democratic, namely, ones that allow for participants to interact effectively (non-coercively, with supported beliefs, and with a likelihood of understanding). Finally, I will show that what I will call “dialogic deliberation” provides the conditions for a democratic form of deliberation because it delivers a way for participants to interact effectively.
Intergroup Dialogue Program The Intergroup Dialogue Program at Central Michigan University is comprised of two types courses in communications—a facilitation training course and an intergroup dialogue course. Meeting three hours one day a week, each class is divided into two segments. The first involves a guest expert who presents information about the topic of the week (racism, sexism, heterosexism, immigration, to name some examples), and the second meets in small groups of seven to ten students who sit in a circle