Public debate in European post-truth politics: narrative(s) on democracy legitimating regulation

The broad scope in which post-truth politics operates requires us to develop a perspective that encompasses the ongoing structural transformation of the connection between the information environment and democracy more generally. We understand modern democracy as being based on a strong linkage between "the procedures and institutions that regulate the making of authoritative decisions and "opinion" [understood as] the extra-institutional domain of political opinions" (Urbinati 2014: 13). Democracy presupposes an epistemic, evaluative and political pluralism that places the debate at the centre of its institutional organisation. That is why alarms and condemnation of the effect of the impact of postmodern visions and their relativist effects miss how important criticism and permanent self-reflection are and their institutional implications: that no one has a monopoly of truth and therefore, a special legitimacy to exercise political power. This work addresses the question of the public sphere from a systemic understanding of democracy that also takes in consideration the connections between institutions and the multiple expressions found in public debates. It is argued that post-truth condition affects the very conception of the links between public debate and decision making in democracy by introducing poor information in the public sphere, increasing distrust in institutions, and disempowering the ability of citizens and their representatives to make informed decisions. But accusations of using disinformation may also increase the polarisation of political actors, favour claims for strong executive action and empower experts perceived as neutral. Post-truth politics enters a feedback loop with public perceptions and the usage of the notion by political actors.