Democratic Society and Democracy

¶ … ETHICS FOR DEMOCRACY? Ethics, Justice and Democracy Which Ethics for Democracy? Democratic forms of individuality can be attained only if institutions are multiplied their practices and discourses created to consolidate democracy. Therefore, these individuals will do so by recognizing their identity that looks at the existence attributed to liberal forms of life democracies. Such a democracy is viewed to be a deliberate one because individuals are involved in stating what is right and what is wrong. Moreover, this democracy establishes a strong link between rationalism and moralism.

In saying this, we imply that the political questions raised will be of a moral nature and become susceptible to receiving a rational treatment. In such a democratic society, the consensus is created rationally reached using appropriate and deliberative procedures. Hence, decisions produced are a representation of a standpoint that is impartial (Mouffe, 2000, p. 86). It is only by having a democratic society that dimensions of antagonism can be erased.

Question 3 Mouffe refuses to acknowledge agonistic democracy because it is for the better of the country because such democrats will always affirm the centrality of conflict in a democratic government. As such, when governments look at agonists' the concern will resemble consensus. Here, they will frequently become co-opting means when it comes to their status quo plus the diffusion of radical challenges. By having this kind of understanding in politics, it gives it a resonance for those societies engaged in political reconciliation.

As such, they will be forced to open political spaces resulting in the engagement of opposing groups. From this, it is evident that processes of reconciliation are inevitably agonistic since they will be a means of opening contestation spacing between opposing groups. Yet, the spaces may have been closed down due to the rise in repression and violence (Mouffe, 2000, p. 87). Evidently, consensus and reconciliation are something that is possible if the right spaces are opened.

Therefore, the country should not be left with the option of accepting agonist and violence but rather, they should look at pursuing consensus and reconciliation. All this is achievable if the political members work together and alienate those antagonists' in a society that open spaces crucial when it comes to the stability of a country's politics. Question 4 The democracy of any given should be able to raise such questions because it shows that they are mature enough to understand what is good or bad for their populations.

Therefore, identifying with violence in the current times is against the human code because we are more enlightened when it comes to violence. From this understanding, they are capable of resolving the issue of antagonism. No person can be considered a full social justice activist if they come from an irrational standpoint because they only see one side of the debate. Activists should be able to weigh both sides but.