Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 22:52:19 -0500 From: Martin Blanchard <tintamar-AT-club-internet.fr> Subject: HAB: sluices and channels A while ago, in a virtual world far away, someone (?), on this list, said that it would be nice to know of every passages where Habermas discusses of the sluice model in BFN. I myself agreed silently, since I find this metaphor quite intriguing. And we know that indexes, even carefully builded, can be incomplete. Well, recently I had to re-read the whole book (what an experience) for a seminar, and I paid attention to any manifestation of sluices. Since I re-read BFN in french, I had to find an english translation to transpose my "research" (so there might be other passages in the english version that the french translator wrote otherwise). The english version I found is the W. Rehg translation, 1996. So here goes, to that anonymous inquiry, every bits and bites you can find about sluices in BFN: - "sluices": p. 170 (line 3); p. 300 (line 14); p. 327 (line 21). - "channels": pp. 264 (line 30); p. 442 (line 33). - the most important passage is pp. 354 - 358, where Habermas discusses and criticizes Bernhard Peters' version of sluices (center-periphery democratic theory). - At page 440, line 26, Habermas criticizes his own and antecedent image of the formal administration as a "besieged fortress" by the ongoing informal public sphere. Funny thing, he doesn't say a word there about the sluice model, but he does say that procedural law acts as a kind of (two-way) "legitimation filter", which is basically the same idea. The fortress image alluded to is in the appendix I, pp. 486 -487. If anybody would like to discuss the sluice model, we've got all the references now (at least in BFN). For my part, I think it has the advantages of taking account the *process* of democratic changes, and to put weight on the fact that the administration concentrates rationality and power behind quasi-closed doors, in such a way though that it can't close the doors (without risking a profound legitimation crisis). But what I didn't yet inquire, is how and in what situation Habermas uses the sluice argument. On first hand, without going back to the passages, I'd venture that it's mostly to rebut the idea that communication power awaits to invade administration - the besieged fortress model. Or maybe to instill a grain of rationality in administration? So that's it. Apologies for my english syntax. Martin Blanchard University of Montreal --- from list habermas-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005