The model of deliberative democracy and the theory of communicative action of Habermas offers a fresh look at interrelation between society and education. Although deliberative democracy encompasses the essential features of liberal democracy which is of modern value, at the same time it embraces fundamental change of understanding of liberal democracy and of attitude to education accordingly. First of all, deliberating process is valuable on its own, because mutual understanding in various social contexts can be achieved only by discussion, not by voting. Secondly, success of consensus might be of various reasons, because of pluralism of discourses. Thirdly, situation of ideal communication always indicates real local contexts. Thus situation of ideal communication is not just mental experiment but also has particular implications on educational theory. The idea of deliberative democracy can be described as education where different individual perspectives are forming continuous communication. So Habermas’ model is oriented to foster citizenship literacy and develop communicational competencies. Evolving open communication in particular could fortify institutions of deliberative democracy.

The aim of the article is to critically analyze communication of public sector of Creative industries (CI) and Cultural and Creative Sector (CCS) in Lithuania. The main attention is paid to explanation of important concepts of EU documents from the point of view of Critical discourse analysis and Critical hermeneutics: making of affects, an economy of experience, creative disruption, multiplicity of memories ... The article considers the Green Book and The Impact of Culture on Creativity and other EU and Lithuanian documents, their ideas and relationships with power, economy and creativity in a perspective of communicative reason. The object of critique is analysis of the case of Fluxus ministry (NGO in Kaunas) and growth of tendencies of meritocracy. I interpret Critical discourse analysis and Critical hermeneutics in a way they were developed in the Critical theory and in the works of Jurgen Habermas devoted to analysis of communicative action and communicative reason. My interpretation of the role of dialogue and some concepts of poststructuralism where I support theories of M. Bakchtin’s tradition differs from Habermas interpretation. Contemporary Critical theory includes not only former Cultural philosophy, but also elements of critique of Cultual industries (tradition of M. Horkheimer and T. Adorno), British Cultural studies and political economy devoted to the questions of CI. Besides, for interpretation of EU documents I use a number of concepts related to the poststructuralism: direct self-government, deliberative democracy, critics of nomenclature and meritocracy, self-spectaclization and creation of open society for diversities. [...]

The purpose of the article is to show the status of deliberative democracy and the conditions for its development in the period of mass propaganda, self-spectaclization, market media and production of information warfare. The paper does not discuss other contemporary political challenges for deliberative democracy, such as secret diplomacy, or politics of forcing to negotiation and recognition. These are very important questions, but the purpose is to considerate the communicative fields, arenas, scenes, related problems of the Real and simulations, propaganda and democracy. For us, important is how deliberative recognition differs from suggested understanding, or from the ideological interpellation, or from engineering of consent? The article highlights the attitude towards the importance of alternative narratives, and polymorphism of the development of deliberative democracy. Multiplication of differences creates a market advantage over a simple propaganda and counter-propaganda, and in the same time, supports development of scenes and imitations instead of supporting democratic arenas. Deliberative democracy is motivated to distinguish politics from the political arena, and simulations from the real alternatives. The article is guided by the situation of the changed status of the propaganda. Propaganda has turned from a mobilizing factor into a pejorative object, a critique which approves simulation of the real. Reasonable deliberation presumes some level of a participatory liberation. Technologies of participatory liberation are, for example, sending agitators, making provocative performances, detournement and creative rebuilding of political arenas. Participatory liberation could be based on the same issues as propaganda, it does not presuppose open, public deliberations. Scenes, the spectacles of the society need skills of consumption but not critical deliberation. [...]