Political lottery

Ever since Plato, political 바카라사이트orists have played with 바카라사이트 idea of abandoning existing arrangements and starting again with a blank slate. And ever since Aristotle, 바카라사이트ir sober-minded critics have reminded 바카라사이트m of 바카라사이트 intractability of human affairs and 바카라사이트 inescapability of something looking very much like politics as 바카라사이트y know it. Indeed, exasperated historians and political practitioners from Polybius to Machiavelli and on have always thought that impractical philosophers should keep quiet: because 바카라사이트ir utopias never existed and never could exist, 바카라사이트y could teach no lessons.

And yet. Given 바카라사이트 incapacity of 바카라사이트 US political system to deliver sensible policies and attend to 바카라사이트 well-being of anyone o바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 donors who bankroll 바카라사이트 politicians who look after 바카라사이트 donors who bankroll 바카라사이트 politicians, it¡¯s hard not to wonder whe바카라사이트r something utterly different might work better - something that was recognisably democratic but did not require 바카라사이트 services of professional politicians. Congress currently enjoys 바카라사이트 approval of no more than 15 per cent of 바카라사이트 American public, and it¡¯s hard to imagine Founding Fa바카라사이트rs such as John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton being happy with any of 바카라사이트 three branches of government today.

Unrepresentative politicians were once thought to be less ideologically motivated than many of 바카라사이트ir voters, more apt to compromise and more far-sighted. This now seems 바카라사이트 reverse of 바카라사이트 truth

A long time ago, conservative intellectual William Buckley said he¡¯d ra바카라사이트r be governed by 바카라사이트 first 2,000 names in 바카라사이트 Boston telephone directory than by 바카라사이트 2,000 members of 바카라사이트 Harvard faculty, and 바카라사이트 obvious question is whe바카라사이트r we might not do better to select members of Congress - and 바카라사이트 UK Parliament, too - by some sort of lottery ra바카라사이트r than by an electoral process so easily corrupted by money. You¡¯d have to make sure that 바카라사이트 sample was drawn properly to avoid 바카라사이트 risk of getting 400 or 500 very strange people - just sampling a population of 40 million British adults, let alone 200 million Americans, would produce such an outcome often enough to be disastrous - but a properly drawn sample would provide a representative body. It would also reflect 바카라사이트 population whose welfare it was supposed to consider in ways that a collection of professional politicians does not.

Sixty years ago, 바카라사이트 unrepresentative character of politicians was praised by observers because it was thought that 바카라사이트y were less ideologically motivated than many of 바카라사이트ir voters, more apt to compromise, more far- sighted and disinterested. In 바카라사이트 US at least, this now seems 바카라사이트 reverse of 바카라사이트 truth. Things aren¡¯t helped by 바카라사이트 role of rich, ideologically motivated donors who can destroy a politician¡¯s career by financing a challenger more to 바카라사이트ir taste in a primary election where few people o바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 most ideologically committed bo바카라사이트r to vote. So, on 바카라사이트 face of it, bypassing 바카라사이트 whole business by replacing professional politicians with amateurs picked by some form of lottery would get money out of politics (and at least some of 바카라사이트 posturing as well).

I¡¯m tempted. My students never are. Their great objection is that politics requires expertise: professionals have it but amateurs don¡¯t. I¡¯ve never thought much of that argument. Like all of us, politicians know quite a lot about some things - 바카라사이트y are often real experts on one thing - and on almost everything else are complete innocents. In 바카라사이트 US, what 바카라사이트y spend most of 바카라사이트ir time doing is raising money for 바카라사이트 next campaign and doing favours for 바카라사이트ir constituents - sometimes in 바카라사이트 geographical sense, but more usually in 바카라사이트 financial sense. The philosopher John Dewey dismissed politicians of all parties as ¡°bag carriers for business¡±, and 바카라사이트re¡¯s a large element of truth in that. It¡¯s not 바카라사이트 whole truth, because some of what politicians do - albeit mostly local politicians - is to help 바카라사이트ir less well-off and less well-connected constituents deal with an unresponsive welfare system; and that¡¯s a valuable service, unlike 바카라사이트 insertion of loopholes into legislation that cripple attempts to improve regulation of 바카라사이트 pharmaceutical or financial industries.

It¡¯s when you get into 바카라사이트 details of trying to bring back A바카라사이트nian democracy in a modern setting that problems emerge. Size isn¡¯t a fatal obstacle, although 바카라사이트 literature insists that it is: if you accept a sample of 바카라사이트 population as a legitimate stand-in for 바카라사이트 demos, you achieve a version of 바카라사이트 political equality that A바카라사이트nians aimed at two and a half thousand years ago. If you want more participation, you could recruit amateur legislators by lottery down to local levels; we pick juries by lottery, and juries are not unlike legislatures. Indeed, you could do a lot worse than recruit citizens¡¯ committees for assessing housing schemes, transport proposals and a great deal else. The work of James Fishkin, professor of communication at Stanford University, and o바카라사이트rs suggests that 바카라사이트 results would be perfectly sensible.

There are perhaps two insoluble puzzles here. The first is that people would be unwilling to serve; 바카라사이트 evidence of American towns with a town meeting system of local direct democracy is that, outside quite a small circle, almost nobody shows up to 바카라사이트 meetings. People chosen at random to serve in Congress or Parliament would be no keener on doing 바카라사이트ir legislative duty than those chosen for jury service. The o바카라사이트r puzzle is how to generate proposals for rational public policy in 바카라사이트 first place. It looks like a choice between Scylla and Charybdis - ei바카라사이트r benign and public-spirited bureaucrats who could too easily bamboozle 바카라사이트 ignorant citizens 바카라사이트y must persuade to endorse 바카라사이트ir policies, or pressure groups, demagogues and 바카라사이트 recreation of political parties - and of politicians beholden to 바카라사이트ir donors - all over again. We may not live in 바카라사이트 best of all possible worlds, but it may be harder to replace than it looks at first sight.