Between Facts and Norms - Contributions to a ... - Blogs Unpad

xxxiiWilliam Rehglarge organizations or of the mass media. Habermas 's model placesconsiderable normative responsibility for the democratic processon those public forums, informal associations, and social movementsin which citizens can effectively voice their concerns. Chapter8 closes with an analysis of the various conditions under whichthe public sphere can fulfill its democratic function. These conditionsinclude channels of communication that link the publicsphere to a robust civil society in which citizens first perceive andidentify social issues; a broad range of informal associations; responsiblemass media; and agenda-setting avenues that allow broadersocial concerns to receive formal consideration within the politicalsystem.In the final chapter, Habermas undergirds his investigation witha fuller account of the paradigmatic dimensions of the proceduralistapproach. His argument thus moves to a deeper level, that ofcompeting "paradigms of law and democracy." Here "paradigm"refers to the basic assumptions about society that inform efforts torealize constitutional-democratic ideals. Precisely because suchefforts must come to grips with real social contexts, they presupposesome idea, even if a tacit one, of a historically specific socialfacticity. Not only judges, lawyers, and legislators, but citizens ingeneral tend to share broad background assumptions about theirsociety, its challenges and possibilities, and how the law shouldrespond to these. Such assumptions can be loosely organizedaround different legal paradigms. In chapter 9, then, Habermasargues for the superiority of the "proceduralist paradigm" over twoinherited paradigms whose opposition has stalemated a number ofcurrent discussions. The liberal paradigm of "bourgeois formallaw," which dominated the nineteenth century, privileges individualfreedom under the banner of minimal government, formalequality before the law, and legal certainty. Meanwhile, however,social inequalities and other problems related to complexity andunrestrained capitalism have, especially in the twentieth century,motivated attempts to instrumentalize law for substantive purposesof social utility. Behind such attempts one can discern a socialwelfareparadigm of "materialized" law, so called because of itsemphasis on the realization of substantive social goals and values(such as welfare provisions, social security, and regulation of