The focus on deliberative democracy has increased considerably within the last decade. So far the literature has primary praised deliberation for its great contributions to almost any political process. E.g., it has been argued widely that greater emphasis on deliberation would enhance the citizens' capabilities to form reasoned and reflective opinions based on the common good rather than self-interest. The focus on the normative potential of deliberation has to a large extent neglected deliberations' many pitfalls and contradictions. One of the most troubling paradoxes in deliberative democracy is the equality paradox. The equality paradox of deliberation relates to the idea that deliberative democrats advocate the importance of securing that the deliberative process fulfills political equality as the participants in the deliberative process are able to express their views freely and openly without any procedural restrictions. At the same time, however it is argued that arguments referring to the common good and public interest should and will be emphasized in a deliberative process, which favors participants accustomed to this kind of reasoning, thus, compromising political equality.

                      Evidence from the a national Danish Deliberative Poll supports the present of equality paradoxes of deliberation, which call for a revision of deliberative democratic theory in order to incorporate and give proper answers to the paradox.

                      The revision of deliberation democracy suggests explicit to acknowledgment the trade-off between political equality and deliberation as a process based on argument which appeal to general interest and secondly increase the systematic use of moderated deliberation in order to provide a stronger opportunity for minorities to express their views.