Dowding, Bosworth and Giuliani: Sortition, Parties and Political Careerism

Posted on April 22, 2025 by Yoram Gat

A new paper in The Political Quarterly:

Sortition, Parties and Political Careerism

Keith Dowding, William Bosworth and Adriano Giuliani

Abstract: One reason for growing distrust of politicians, parties, and governments is the increase in ‘careerism’: politicians who have never worked outside politics and seem to work inside politics for themselves as much as for the common good. Sortition—choosing representatives by lottery—is one solution. However, random selection of representatives breaks the accountability link provided by elections and leaves amateur politicians at the mercy of their civil servants. It would, critics argue, destroy competitive party politics, the foundation of modern democracy.

We suggest that parties select their candidates through sortition of party members, with successful incumbent MPs standing again. This would mitigate the ills of patronage and adverse selection without losing professionalism and political experience. It would encourage deliberation and the proper persuasive and representation function of parties, alongside the accountability that elections provide. It would also, we suggest, lead to better advice to politicians from policy units within and outside the public service.

Keywords: careerism, democracy, political careers, political parties, professional politicians, sortition

Filed under: Academia, Elections, Press, Proposals, Sortition | 8 Comments »

Sortition Research – What do we need to learn to make better recommendations on sortition?

Posted on April 20, 2025 by johnhuang865

“What is the best government?” Can we answer this empirically? What kind of research could be conducted to answer these questions? I ask the readers of this blog to generate some ideas.

Potential Research Areas

Randomly Controlled Trials

Small-scale trials of democracy are indeed possible, and it might be possible to measure outcomes. Randomly Controlled Trials (RCT) are the typical gold standard, where a random selection of participants get a treatment and the rest are assigned as the control group.

For example labor unions or worker owned cooperatives might be persuaded with financial incentives to become test subjects. However, small scale trials might not be able to simulate the incentive structures of large democracies which may be subject to phenomenon such as “rational ignorance” and the reduction of the “expected value” of a participant’s vote.

On the other hand, perhaps small organizations *are* able to simulate these incentives. For example the much reviled American Homeowner’s Association, allegedly run democratically at smaller scales yet also hated by its participants. Because many do not participate, this leads to the self-selection of busy-bodies who annoy the nonparticipants. Could sortition be a solution to HOA hatred?

Continue reading →

Filed under: Sortition | 8 Comments »

International Network of Sortition Advocates presents

Posted on April 15, 2025 by richwbrown

Sortition in Professional Organisations:

What can we learn from their practice?

In previous presentations, participants have learned the value of integrating sortition into businesses and organisations and some steps to achieve this.

Join Dr. Aaron Gain as he highlights case study examples of organisations that are using sortition—what has worked and what hasn’t.

About the Speaker: Dr. Aaron Gain is a researcher, educator and manager focusing on using mixed research methods to understand organizational and people development, employee and stakeholder engagement and workplace democracy.  Exploring alternative non-managerial forms of organising is central to his work.  He is also a volunteer mentor for young social entrepreneurs.

He has a background in health and care as well as consultancy, having worked for the National Health Service, The Australian Department of Health and Human Services, Deloitte and various charities.

Date: Wednesday, 7 May 2025

[8 May in Asia & Australia]

Time: 18:00-19:00 London

[19:00-20:00 Europe/Copenhagen • 1:00-2:00 PM US Eastern • 10:00 AM US Pacific]

Location: Online – Registration at Eventbrite

FREE – Reserve your spot now!

INSA is a volunteer organisation aimed at connecting pro-sortition academics, advocates, and activists around the world, to share resources & tactics and advance the theoretical understanding and practice of sortition. 

You are invited to join our Discord server at

https://discord.gg/6sgnrphp6w

Filed under: meeting, Sortition | Leave a comment »

Handpicking the candidates – a possibility that remains unaddressed

Posted on April 12, 2025 by Yoram Gat

The Kleroterion is a sculpture by Taryn Simon. It was originally presented at the Storm King art center in New York in 2024. It is now on display at Gagosian Gallery in New York. Alfred Mac Adam, Professor of Latin American literature at Barnard College-Columbia University, reviews the work at The Brooklyn Rail, a website billing itself as “Critical perspectives on art, politics and Culture. Independent and Free”.

Adam explains the workings of the sculpture:

The machine randomly picked one from a group thus avoiding any possibility for corruption. Simon’s recreation, which looks something like a classic PEZ dispenser as Donald Judd might have reconfigured it, stands alone in one room of the gallery. The space is curtained in red drapery, with red carpet on the flooring forming a pathway to the kleroterion. To run the device, each of five viable candidates for office would be assigned a colored lozenge. The lozenges would be inserted into a slot and a crank turned until all but one lozenge were ejected from the machine, declaring the winner.

As Adam describes things, and indeed, looking at the device itself which has very few slots, Simon’s device is quite different from the Athenian kleroterion. Continue reading →

Filed under: Elections, History, Sortition | Leave a comment »

Mr. Smarty Pants introduces his readers to sortition

Posted on April 12, 2025 by Yoram Gat

It appears that Mr. Smarty Pants Knows is a brief section in The Austin Chronicle which introduces readers to the lesser known words and expressions of the English language. The April 11th, 2025 of edition of this section introduces its readers to the word sortition (among a few other words). The author provides a short rationalization for the mechanism.

Have you ever been selected for jury duty? Sortition is the selection of public officials or jurors at random to get a representative sample. In ancient Athens, they believed sortition was more democratic than holding elections because oligarchs couldn’t buy their way into office.

Filed under: Elections, History, Press, Sortition | Leave a comment »

Representation as Embodiment

Posted on April 11, 2025 by keithsutherland

‘May you live in interesting times’ is both an ancient Chinese curse and an accurate description of current politics. Despite often being at opposite ends of the policy scale, lottocrats and charismatic populists share the same perspective on ‘representation as embodiment’, as illustrated in this crude mash-up of the frontispiece to Hobbes’s Leviathan (1651 m/s drawing). Both camps (while often disagreeing on policy matters) claim that the Mortall God is an emergent property of popular sovereignty. Lafont and Urbinati (2024) equate lottocracy with populism: populism has an unaccountable leader who is supposed to ‘embody’ the nation; lottocracy has an unaccountable assembly that is supposed to ‘embody’ the nation.
Continue reading →

Filed under: Academia, Books, Elections, Sortition | 35 Comments »

Summer Anwer: The Need for Ireland’s Citizens’ Assemblies in a Post Roe America

Posted on April 5, 2025 by Yoram Gat

A post by Summer Anwer, an undergraduate student at American University.

The intention of Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women Health Organization Supreme Court ruling was to give the authority to regulate abortion back to the people and their elected representatives. To uphold this intention and thus validate the ruling, the people’s voices of each state must be prioritized in decision making. States should adopt a form of Ireland’s citizens’ assembly to navigate abortion laws while putting citizens at the forefront of decision-making like the Supreme Court ruling intended.

Ireland’s 35-year battle for abortion rights

In 1983, the Eighth Amendment was introduced to the Constitution and established a constitutional ban against abortion. Following this strict prohibition of abortion was a 35-year battle for safe abortion access.

Several international human rights organizations called on Ireland to repeal the Eighth Amendment. The UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights was “particularly concerned at the criminalization of abortion, including in the cases of rape and incest and of risk to the health of a pregnant woman; the lack of legal and procedural clarity on what constitutes a real substantive risk to the life, as opposed to the health, of the pregnant woman; and the discriminatory impact on women who cannot afford to obtain an abortion abroad or access to the necessary information.”

The Citizens’ Assembly of Ireland

In 2012, Ireland created an assembly of majority citizens to discuss important topics and influence the Oireachtas, the Irish parliament. 66 citizens were randomly selected from the electorate. They require no prior knowledge, as they are given time and background information. The result is a truly representative opinion of what Ireland’s future should be. The assembly merely makes recommendations, which parliament is not required to accept. The other 33 people are politicians and the 100th person is Tom Arnold, a prominent economist.

In 2017, the citizens’ assembly voted that the Eighth Amendment also known as Article 40.3.3º should be repealed. They were given four ballots to shape the referendum, which gradually became more specific about the parameters of the potential referendum.. In 2018, the Irish government sent out a referendum for Irish citizens to vote on which asked if they wished to approve the 36th Amendment which would repeal the Eighth Amendment. 66.4% voted yes which allowed the government to introduce legislation permitting abortion in the first 12 weeks of gestation and up to 24 weeks in some circumstances. Within one year of being presented with this topic, the citizens’ assembly was able to completely change abortion policies to allow for safer abortion access. This proves that allowing the people to choose their nation’s policies and giving them a larger voice in decision-making is more efficient and leads to a happier, healthier society.
Continue reading →

Filed under: Academia, Applications, Proposals, Sortition | Leave a comment »

Politician criminality, an insoluble electoralist dilemma

Posted on April 3, 2025 by Yoram Gat

The recent judgment against Marine Le Pen in France has been compared to the decision against Georgescu in Romania. In each case a prominent “extreme right wing” candidate in a European country has been barred from participating in an election campaign in which they had a fair chance of winning. In fact, however, Le Pen’s case is much more similar to that of Turkey’s Imamoglu than to Georgescu’s.

First, unlike Georgescu, whose electoral win was retroactively annulled and who was barred from an election that is merely weeks away, Le Pen’s and Imamoglu’s electoral potential in elections that are years away is speculative. Second, and more importantly, while Georgescu was disqualified on openly political grounds, Le Pen and Imamoglu are being disqualified due to being convicted for illegal actions (or may be convicted and disqualified in the case of Imamoglu who has been arrested but not convicted or officially disqualified yet, I believe). The merits of the cases against Le Pen and Imamoglu may (or may not) be very different, but unlike the case of Georgescu, formally these cases are of the same type in the sense that they are both matters of legal determination rather than of setting political limits on candidates.
Continue reading →

Filed under: Elections, Press | 1 Comment »