Chapter 7: Conclusion: Democratic Institutions for Radical Proceduralists and Other Citizens

People in democratic societies tend to disagree: they disagree about environmental justice, the relationship between the state and religious communities and about candidates for the upcoming presidential election. They disagree about strategies for dealing with gender inequalities in the workplace and the appropriate extent of taxation or welfare support, about public transport and traffic management. People not only disagree about such matters; they often have good reasons to disagree – and frequently, they disagree in good faith (Waldron, 1999, pp. 14; 93). In the “circumstances of politics,” citizens nonetheless need to act in concert and find procedures that allow them to cope with their disagreements (Waldron, 1999, p. 102). The fundamental democratic convictions and intuitions that this book took as a point of departure suggest that “legitimate” coping strategies must realize everybody's equal autonomy – they must respect and fairly include the perspectives and preferences of all affected citizens.