Public Reason: Vol. 10, No. 2, 2018 & Vol. 11, No. 1, 2019
Deliberative Democracy and the Secret Ballot: Can we keep both? Three Areas of Tension
Rasmus Uhrenfeldt

Recently, Bart Engelen and Thomas Nys have offered an analysis of some of the nondeliberative properties of the secret ballot. This marks an interesting theoretical approach that I will build upon in this paper. I do this by identifying and discussing three areas of tension between deliberative ideals and secretive voting. I divide these areas into three separate categories – which I label the justificatory tension, the self-regarding tension, and the sincerity tension. I argue that both the justificatory tension and the self-regarding tension signify substantial areas of tension between the current practice of secretive voting and some of the ideals within deliberative democracy. In the last section of the paper, I argue that one way to reduce the tension between the practice of secretive voting and deliberative ideals is to adopt an epistemic approach to deliberation.

Key words: deliberative democracy, secret ballot, public voting, ethics of voting.

Citation

Rasmus, Uhrenfeldt. 2019. Deliberative Democracy and the Secret Ballot: Can we keep both? Three Areas of Tension.Public Reason 10 (2) - 11 (1): 27-44.