What are emergent publics?

The idea that when a new technology draws previously unconnected people into affecting one another, the people affected form a new "public", which then needs to govern that problem itself. It comes from the philosopher John Dewey, and the book *Plurality* makes it a pillar of its view of democracy.

Suppose a factory is built upstream on a river, and the water in a town downstream becomes polluted. The people who suffer are the townspeople downstream. But the factory is in another town, and they have no place to have a say over it. Who should govern connections like this, newly created by technology, and how? The American philosopher John Dewey offered an answer: the idea of "emergent publics". The book ⿻ Plurality makes it a pillar of its view of democracy.

In short

Like railroads, radio and factory smoke, new technologies draw previously unconnected people into relationships in which they affect one another. When that happens, the people affected form a group, that is, a new "public" comes into being. And that public needs to govern the problem itself, apart from the existing frames of countries and local governments [1].

A "public" here means the group of people concerned with a given problem. "Emergent" means arising naturally from below, rather than being set from above.

For example

Railroads, radio and industrial pollution. The book introduces Dewey's examples: "Railroads connected people commercially and socially who would never have met. Radio created shared political understanding and action across thousands of miles. Pollution from industry was affecting rivers and urban air" [1].

The connections created this way come with problems, such as railway tariffs, safety standards, the spread of disease and fair access to scarce radio. According to the book, these problems "are poorly managed by both capitalist markets and preexisting 'democratic' governance structures" [1].

Working men's newspapers and halls. Before Dewey, the book looks back at the time of the sociologist Georg Simmel. New groups were forming then, such as cross-sectoral working men's associations representing the general interest of labor, and emerging feminist associations. The key was creating places (workmen's halls) or publications (working men's newspapers) where the new group could come to know one another [2].

People who acted as "mirrors". New connections are hard to see in everyday life. The book calls the people who notice them, explain them to those involved, and help a new public come into being "mirrors". As historical examples, it names "union leaders, founders of rural electricity cooperatives, and the leaders who founded the United Nations" [3].

In more detail

Dewey's book and a debate

Dewey set out this idea in his 1927 book The Public and its Problems. According to the book Plurality, it grew out of a debate with Walter Lippmann, who argued for government by experts. Dewey considered Lippmann's Public Opinion (1922) "the most effective indictment of democracy as currently conceived". He fully accepted the criticism that existing institutions are ill-suited to a complex, fast-moving world, and set out to redeem democracy on that basis [1].

Chapter 2-1 of the book also notes that Dewey visited China in 1919, where Sun Yat-sen met him, and gave over 200 lectures there [4].

Why markets fail here

According to the book, such technologies create market power and effects on people outside the transaction (externalities). More generally, they exhibit supermodularity (the whole is greater than the sum of its parts) [1].

Companies cannot account for all the effects that spread beyond them. To the extent they try, they gain market power, raise prices and shut people out, undermining the value that is created. So leaving these connections "to the market", the book writes, "exacerbates their risks and harms while failing to leverage their potential" [1].

Why existing democracy fails too

Dewey revered democracy as the most fundamental principle. Even so, the book says, "he saw the limits of existing 'democratic' institutions just as severely as those of capitalism" [1].

In the book's summary, an institution is not democratic just because it has voting. Many oligarchies had that form. Nor would a global "democracy" directly managing the affairs of a village count as democratic. "Core to true democracy is the idea that the 'relevant public', the set of people whose lives are actually shaped by the phenomenon in question, manage that challenge" [1].

Technology keeps creating new connections that almost never match existing national borders or administrative divisions. So, the book says, "true democracy requires new publics to constantly emerge and reshape existing jurisdictions" [1].

A "mirror" steps back when the job is done

The book explains the role of the "mirror" using George Washington as an example. Washington helped Americans see themselves as a nation, and as a nation that had to democratically choose its fate after his term in office. When his role was over, he returned to his estate at Mount Vernon [3].

In the same way, mirrors notice and explain new connections (solidarity among workers, the chain from carbon to global warming). "Once this emergent public is understood, recognized, and empowered to govern the new interdependence, the role of the mirror fades away" [3].

Democracy as "a process even more dynamic than a market"

In conclusion, the book describes democracy not as "the static system of representation of a nation-state with fixed borders", but as "a process even more dynamic than a market". "Standard institutions of nation state-based voting are to such a process as pale a shadow as Newtonian mechanics is of the underlying quantum and relativistic reality. True democracy must be ⿻ and constantly evolving" [5].

What is debated

"Emerging" or "emergent"? The English word "emergent" carries two senses: newly appearing, and arising from below. The Japanese edition renders the term 創発的公衆 (publics that arise from below), and the Traditional Chinese edition 新興公眾 (newly arising publics) [6][7]. The core of the book's explanation is the order of events: first comes the connection (a relationship of mutual effect), and afterwards the people affected come together as a public [1].
A point of contact with vTaiwan (outside the book). A 2018 paper on vTaiwan, Taiwan's space for citizen discussion, writes that vTaiwan was designed as a "recursive public": participants can decide the topic, how it is discussed, and even the tools used. In its conclusion, the paper says vTaiwan serves as the "voice of the relevant public". The paper itself, however, does not spell out a link to Dewey [8].
A reader's response. In reading notes on the book, Jeffrey Fossett calls the view of experts as "mirrors" a very interesting way of thinking about the role of expertise in society, and expresses a wish to read Dewey's book all the way through [9].

Where it fits in Plurality

Its home is the section on Dewey, "John Dewey's emergent publics", in chapter 3-2, "Connected Society". The chapter's epigraph also comes from Dewey's same book: a passage saying that the new public "remains long inchoate, unorganized, because it cannot use inherited political agencies" [10]. The section is presented as the mirror image of the previous section, on intersectional identity (Simmel) [5].

Chapter 3-3, "The Lost Dao", writes that as the internet spread worldwide, "there was (as Dewey predicted) no clear public authority to make the investments needed". It also writes that "Suzuki seems to believe that for Dewey's emergent publics to flourish, the source of power itself must be emergent" [11]. → Nameraka Society

Chapter 5-7, "Social Markets", cites Dewey's book again, and writes that in the future, democratic governance by emergent publics could take the place of ordinary corporate management [12].

Chapter 7-0 ("Policy") introduces a reform wave Dewey was associated with, which did not simply out-compete private power generation but sought to bring it under partly local democratic control through utility boards. The book writes that its own proposals for digital infrastructure closely resemble this [13].

Related ideas include ⿻ publics, from chapter 4-2, and adaptive administration.

Sources

Plurality, 3-2, section "John Dewey's emergent publics" — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/3-2/eng/ ［CC0］
Same, first paragraph — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/3-2/eng/ ［CC0］
Same, the paragraph on "mirrors" — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/3-2/eng/ ［CC0］
Plurality, 2-1 "A View from Yushan", section "Tridemism" — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/2-1/eng/ ［CC0］
Plurality, 3-2, end of the section "John Dewey's emergent publics" — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/3-2/eng/ ［CC0］
Plurality, Japanese edition, 3-2 (in Japanese) — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/3-2/jpn/ ［CC0］
Plurality, Traditional Chinese edition, 3-2 (in Chinese) — https://github.com/pluralitybook/plurality/tree/main/contents/traditional-mandarin ［CC0］
"vTaiwan: An Empirical Study of Open Consultation Process in Taiwan" (2018) — https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/xyhft ［CC BY 4.0］
Jeffrey Fossett, "Notes on the Plurality Book" — https://jeffreyfossett.com/2023/12/27/notes-on-plurality-book.html
Plurality, 3-2 "Connected Society", opening epigraph — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/3-2/eng/ ［CC0］
Plurality, 3-3 "The Lost Dao" — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/3-3/eng/ ［CC0］
Plurality, 5-7 "Social Markets" — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/5-7/eng/ ［CC0］
Plurality, 7-0 "Policy" — https://www.plurality.net/v/chapters/7-0/eng/ ［CC0］

We welcome error reports and questions ("What is…?"). Submissions become public issues.

Report an error in this article ・ Ask a question