The public interests should be the way achieving the individual benefits. In Rousseau’s theory, the public opinion is one kind of highly unsurpassed values. According to the Arrow Impossibility theorem, when each ind...The public interests should be the way achieving the individual benefits. In Rousseau’s theory, the public opinion is one kind of highly unsurpassed values. According to the Arrow Impossibility theorem, when each individual’s value criterion is emphasized, the absolute public interests will never exist. At the same time, the public choice theory proved that the public interests would be confirmed by the procedures, if these choice procedures are under certain rules. Habermas emphasized that the validity of public opinon must come from the wide participation by citizens. And only the inter-subjective consensus through widespread discussions in the public domain would be the legitimate public interests. The common part between Habermas and Rousseau is that they both emphasized the citizen participation in the origin of the political legitimacy; what is different, Habermas emphasized necessity of procedure in achieving inter-subjective consensus among citizens. The common part between Habermas’ theory and the public choice theory is that they both emphasized the principle of procedure legitimacy; the difference is that Habermas’ theory emphasized the continued political participation by citizens in the public domain. In the realistic political process, when the public interests are implemented, it is necessary to follow the legitimate procedures, respect the mutual recognition and compensate the victimized individuals.展开更多
文摘The public interests should be the way achieving the individual benefits. In Rousseau’s theory, the public opinion is one kind of highly unsurpassed values. According to the Arrow Impossibility theorem, when each individual’s value criterion is emphasized, the absolute public interests will never exist. At the same time, the public choice theory proved that the public interests would be confirmed by the procedures, if these choice procedures are under certain rules. Habermas emphasized that the validity of public opinon must come from the wide participation by citizens. And only the inter-subjective consensus through widespread discussions in the public domain would be the legitimate public interests. The common part between Habermas and Rousseau is that they both emphasized the citizen participation in the origin of the political legitimacy; what is different, Habermas emphasized necessity of procedure in achieving inter-subjective consensus among citizens. The common part between Habermas’ theory and the public choice theory is that they both emphasized the principle of procedure legitimacy; the difference is that Habermas’ theory emphasized the continued political participation by citizens in the public domain. In the realistic political process, when the public interests are implemented, it is necessary to follow the legitimate procedures, respect the mutual recognition and compensate the victimized individuals.
