Abstract
For several years many contemporary discussions amongst political theorists have been aiming at the concepts of deliberative democracy and agonistic pluralism. The former has its source in the work of J.
Habermas. The most prominent author of the latter is Ch.
Mouffe. While deliberative democracy implies rational and argumentative exchange of opinions between free and equal citizens without the internal and external constraints, agonistic pluralism emphasizes the positive role of conflicts and passions in society.
In the paper, I clarify the main features of both concepts. Consequently, I try to elucidate the pros and cons of the theories and compare them with certain principles of political liberalism, as proposed by J.
Rawls. Ultimately, as the potential "third way" between the mentioned models of democracy a concept of democratic liberalism is presented.
It is assumed that the model would provide an incentive for citizens to take a broader perspective on themselves and their diverse interests.