Emile Durkheim, republicanism and deliberative democracy

Emile Durkheim has written only a few sociological texts on democracy, but they seem to remain important both for neo-republican theories and for the idea of deliberative democracy. The paper tries to explain this paradox through a reconstruction of Durkheim's conception of political democracy, which implies three channels of communication: within the state, between the state and civil society and within civil society. The first one is the only one which rests upon deliberation, in the two meanings of this word in French (collective discussion and decision). The paternalist dimension of Durkheim's conception clearly appears in the way he understands the typical pathologies of democracy. This paternalist dimension is also to be found in neo-republican theories. Conversely, the absence of the notion of public sphere distances Durkheim from the concept of deliberative democracy, even though he develops a non-substantialist notion of democracy and gives an important role to reflection in political communication. However, discussing Durkheim makes it possible to underline some of the problems and challenges which a conception of deliberative democracy has to face.