How the answer moves
The flow snapshot — the routes in, the body, the counter-view and the routes out.
Flow snapshot — how the answer moves
Intro routes
not rival models → two halves of one legitimacy → participation = demos, deliberation = logos statement marks the exact failure point → each collapses without the other → breadth needs depth, depth needs breadth
Body flow
participatory democracy = active citizen beyond the ballot → Pateman: participation revives civic life, counters alienation → but headcount alone turns populist → loses credence → deliberative democracy fills the gap: quality of reasoning → Habermas: communicative action, better argument over power → reasoned debate gives participation its credence → but narrow expert deliberation = elite discourse → loses salience → each completes the other: inclusion makes deliberation authoritative, reason makes participation credible → Barber's strong democracy = participation + debate -. Rousseau: sovereign people who must continuously deliberate
Counter-view
fusion is a demand, not a guarantee → Fraser: single public sphere reproduces inequality, needs counter-publics → skilled speakers form an epistemic elite → mobilisation can still capture participation
Conclusion routes
statement holds → deliberation alone = elite talk, no salience → participation alone = populist noise, no credence Fishkin's deliberative polling / citizen assemblies fuse wide participation + evidence-based reason – legitimacy needs demos and logos together
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
