What Is the EU’s Vision of Democracy in the Post-Truth Scenario? A Conceptual Analysis of the Institutional Narratives of the Public Sphere in the “Democracy Action Plan”
Contributing to recent academic and public debates on how European democracies shouldrespond to a scenario of “post-truth politics”, this article explores the idea of democracy thatunderlies current regulatory responses in the “European Democracy Action Plan” (EDAP). Itoffers a conceptual analysis o...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad Loyola Andalucía |
| Repositorio: | Biblos-e Archivo. Repositorio Institucional de la UAM |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:dnet:biblosearchi::ee1dd2adcaecf7a0dda6b9980f947f5a |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10486/717741 https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2024.2382662 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | European Union regulation disinformation Jürgen Habermas public sphere systemic view of deliberation Derecho |
| Sumario: | Contributing to recent academic and public debates on how European democracies shouldrespond to a scenario of “post-truth politics”, this article explores the idea of democracy thatunderlies current regulatory responses in the “European Democracy Action Plan” (EDAP). Itoffers a conceptual analysis of the institutional narratives in the EDAP illustrating normativeexpectations of the public sphere and transformations of the basic concepts in the Europeanpolity. It revisits the famous Habermasian systemic view of deliberation emphasizing theinterconnections of the social and institutional realms through the public sphere in democ-racies. We argue that previous scholarship has focused too much on the presumed loss ofconsensus originated from the digital transformations in the public sphere without takinginto consideration other institutional changes within the EU. The analysis of the key con-cepts illustrates the normative expectations of specific measures and shows that there is evi-dence of a systemic view in the EDAP, with different modes of intervention, partiallycoherent with Habermas’ normative expectations. We conclude that the vision of democ-racy in the EDAP has been developed for decades to legitimate the EU’s developmentand initiatives, but that it also incorporates a reformulation of some concepts justified bya post-truth scenario |
|---|