ParPolity

Posted on April 27, 2013 by Yoram Gat

Tomas Mancebo wrote to point out a proposal for a constitutional system by Stephen Shalom called Participatory politics, or ParPolity, which contains a sortition-based element.

The main part of the proposal is a “nested councils” structure – a standard proposal of a hierarchical structure of elected bodies where each body elects a representative to a higher-level body:

Unlike typical direct elections, a good political system must give people an organic connection to those they elect so they can adequately monitor their performance and remove them when necessary. There cannot be large or remote constituencies that render monitoring impossible or even burdensome.

Unlike typical indirect elections, a good political system must ensure that the people’s will does not get attenuated through each intermediate level of voting.
Continue reading →

Filed under: Academia, Elections, Proposals, Sortition | 4 Comments »

Minimal Reforms

Posted on April 23, 2013 by keithsutherland

“What minimal reforms would you like to see implemented given the reasons you advocate for sortition?”

The subject of this sentence is “minimal reforms”, so this would indicate an emphasis on practical implementation (or, even, incrementalism), as opposed to a blueprint for the New Jerusalem, Utopia, New Atlantis, Aleatoria or the Republic of Politdoche. The latter would require a different strand with a focus on utopian literature, revolutionary pamphlets, polemical tracts, diatribes and science fiction. I suggest also that if we are going to comment on other people’s suggestions we should avoid the use of sarcasm, sloganising and name-calling. (Note, though, these are only suggestions, rather than [authoritarian] edicts.)

Filed under: Action, Applications, Initiatives, Proposals, Sortition | 19 Comments »

Why is sortition a good idea? A participant survey

Posted on April 20, 2013 by Ahmed R. Teleb

I am curious–seems it would be helpful for anyone interested in sortition–what the different grounds people have for advocating it are. The idea here is not about particular forms of selection by lot, but why might it be a good idea in general.

Please comment with your personal reason(s) in one or two sentences max. It would be best to avoid comment on other people’s comments.

Filed under: meta, Sortition, Theory | Tagged: , , | 26 Comments »

Write a note to George Monbiot

Posted on April 15, 2013 by Yoram Gat

Update: Monbiot responded as follows:

Interesting: many thanks for this Yoram. G

George Monbiot is frustrated with government:

Most of the world’s people are decent, honest and kind. Most of those who dominate us are inveterate bastards. This is the conclusion I’ve reached after many years of journalism. Writing on Black Monday, as the British government’s full-spectrum attack on the lives of the poor commences, the thought keeps returning to me.

He asks:

So the age-old question comes knocking: why does the decent majority allow itself to be governed by a brutal, antisocial minority?

He is looking for inspiring, transfiguring ideas that will show a way out of this predicament. Please join me and write a note to Monbiot to offer sortition as such a crucial idea.

Here is what I wrote:

Continue reading →

Filed under: Action, Press, Sortition | 11 Comments »

A. H. J. Greenidge: Appointment by lot in Athens

Posted on April 13, 2013 by Yoram Gat

In 1896 A. H. J. Greenidge published his book A Handbook of Greek Constitutional History. Greenidge devotes a few pages to sortition (“appointment by lot”). He proposes theoretical justification and analysis of the effects of the mechanism.

At this point we may naturally raise the question, “What is the meaning of this new element in political life which was destined to become almost the most characteristic feature of the Athenian and other democracies?” From the treatment of the lot by Plato and Aristotle we should be inclined to gather that it was a consciously adopted democratic institution, that it was the final assertion of the numerical equality of all citizens and of the principle of equal representation. But to realise this character it must be accompanied by universal admission to office. We know, however, that the use of the lot preceded universal admission; we shall see, when we come to discuss the qualifications for office, that in early Athens it was an assertion of the equal fitness for rule of the members of only a narrow circle; and we are further informed that in some cases of its employment it had other meanings than that of an assertion of equality. Continue reading →

Filed under: Athens, Books, History | 22 Comments »

Mencken: The two kinds of democracy

Posted on April 12, 2013 by Yoram Gat

H.L. Mencken‘s 1927 book Notes on Democracy is an interesting document. On the one hand it is a candid expression of a proud elitist worldview. Mencken spends considerable space explicitly denigrating the average person. In short:

There are men who are naturally intelligent and can learn, and there are men who are naturally stupid and cannot. (p. 17)

Such views cannot be expressed in polite society today, and although it is pretty clear that Mencken is aware that his stridency is politically incorrect, it is also pretty clear that he is expressing ideas that were acceptable, even conventional wisdom, in elite circles of his time.

On the other hand, Mencken devotes much attention to the problems of the electoral process as well (which he identifies with democracy). His anti-democratic attitude allows him to criticize the electoral system in a way that those with commitments either to the existing system or to democracy usually cannot afford. As Mencken damns voters for being stupid and electoral politicians for being scoundrels, Mencken points at several problematic fundamental characteristics of the system, belying his main thrust which focuses on personal characteristics. Here, for example, is the principle of distinction:

Democratic man is stupid, but he is not so stupid that he does not see the government as a group of men devoted to his exploitation that is, as a group external to his own group, and with antagonistic interests. (p. 197)

Mencken’s treatment of “direct democracy” – the standard remedy for the problems of the electoral system – is rather insightful: Continue reading →

Filed under: Books, Elections, History, Participation | 13 Comments »

Is the word government a problem?

Posted on April 11, 2013 by Ahmed R. Teleb

This is a change of pace from the previous posts, and an issue not yet discussed on EbyL as far as I know. To express a new dynamic between citizen and political institutions, through selection by lot and possibly other reforms, would we need a word besides “gov’t”?

The full article is here. I suggest we comment on that site (DaftBlogger), especially explaining sortition or Equality by Lot, as a way to develop some cross traffic and build awareness.

“A ship is safe in harbor, but that’s not what ships are for.”
William Shedd

Finally, uncannily, a philosophical-linguistic dimension leaves us astounded and open-mouthed.

The word “govern” means to rule over, originating from the Greek kybernân = to steer and kybernḗt = helmsman, tillerman! The word “cybernetics,” by the way, shares this root.

Mr. Tillerman is no appraisal of contemporary government, or American isolationism, or American imperialism. Mr. Tillerman stands for 2500 years of a conception of government as controlling, disciplining machine. To some, it means controlling the masses or keeping their hands off the property of elites. For others, it means checking the abuse of the weak by the strong. For some, it means limiting the influence of social organizations like the church. Again for others, it means curbing the economic power of moneyed elites.

Continue reading →

Filed under: meta, Sortition, Theory | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 42 Comments »

Putsch: Iceland‘s crowd-sourced constitution killed by parliament

Posted on April 11, 2013 by keithsutherland

Extracted from Thorvaldur Gylfason’s blog:

Following its spectacular plunge from grace in 2008 when its banking system crashed, Iceland invited the people of Iceland to draft a new post-crash constitution designed inter alia to reduce the likelihood of another crash. A National Assembly was convened comprising 950 individuals selected at random from the national registry. Every Icelander 18 years or older had an equal chance of being selected to a seat in the assembly. Next, from a roaster of 522 candidates from all walks of life, 25 representatives were elected by the nation to a Constitutional Assembly to draft a new constitution reflecting the popular will as expressed by the National Assembly. Believe it or not, the Supreme Court, with eight of its nine justices at the time having been appointed by the Independence Party, now disgraced as the main culprit of the crash and in opposition, annulled the Constitutional Assembly election on flimsy and probably also illegal grounds, a unique event. . .

Filed under: Elections, Initiatives, Sortition | 7 Comments »

PR

Posted on April 2, 2013 by Yoram Gat

Ahmed R. Teleb writes:

The more I explore Equality By Lot the more I’m impressed by the quantity of information and the quality of the discussions.

When Yoram linked to some informative posts from 2 and 3 years ago, I realized that a lot of the work you Kleroterians are doing is virtually invisible on the Internet. I know it because months ago I actively searched and only happened upon one or two posts.

There are some quick, easy remedies for the issue. Here are three.

First, “tags” help posts appear in search results. For example the page we’re on should not only be filed under its current “categories” but it should also include tags taken from the post itself and words that someone is likely to search under. On this post, “direct democracy, deep democracy, participatory democracy, electoral systems, alternatives to elections, sortition, selection by lot, sortition in the judiciary, experts and democracy, representation, etc….” The more the better. You can create a template of recurring “tags” and then adjust it to the particular post by adding or deleting.

Second, a “@Kleroterians” or “@EbyL” on Twitter could spread the word about new posts from and anything that you would like out to the general public. If you’d like, I could to set-up and (co)manage either account, and to spread word through my own social media circles as well.

Third, is the easiest. This blog should have a .com or .org. It costs $10 for the first $5 for the second. To keep everything the same, i.e. have the url changed (redirected) WP asks $13/year. It is something to consider, that would make it just a bit easier for someone to find EbyL or to type it into a browser.

Filed under: meta | 9 Comments »

Readers’ responses

Posted on April 1, 2013 by Yoram Gat

This is my summary of points raised in the comment thread for my article in Haayal Hakore.

Representativity of sortition

  1. Would the sampled delegates produce representative policy?

    1. Would they bother to spend the effort to study public policy?

    2. Wouldn’t they be easy to manipulate?

    3. Wouldn’t they be easy to bribe?

    4. Wouldn’t they promote narrow interests, hoping to be rewarded later?

  2. Since there are many population characteristics, the sample would be unrepresentative according to some of those.

  3. If people can opt out, then shy people and people with interesting personal lives would be under-represented.

  4. The training and service experiences would likely cause people to change their minds about various issues and in this way become unrepresentative.

  5. Sampling probabilities – how likely is misrepresentation due to chance variations?

  6. Continue reading →

Filed under: Elections, Proposals, Sortition | 9 Comments »

« Previous Page — Next Page »