Against Elections reminds us that elections are not synonymous with democracy, despite the rampant "electoral fundamentalism" that treats them as the same. "After all, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 states as such: 'the will of the people shall be the basis of authority of government; this shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections....'" Van Reybrouk argues that the current problems with our democracies stem from a disconnect between the governors and the governed, and that elections can do nothing to ameliorate that disconnect.
He recommends that we return to the Athenian method of sortition, aka the drawing of lots. Appointing (certain) officials in the same way we create juries would be far more democratic and would also increase engagement. Van Reybrouk provides several examples, both ancient and modern, where aleatoric methods have been incorporated into decision making.
The book does a good job making me question unexamined assumptions about democratic governance, and it describes the current crisis well (especially for Europe, since the author is Belgian). I find the recommendations less convincing. None of the modern examples, such as revising the Icelandic constitution or Canadian electoral reform, was an unqualified success. The description of van Reybrouk's preferred system sounds like the summary of an alien civilization. After pointing to jury selection as a model, the author should have explicitly addressed the problems in that system such as unrepresentative juries, outrageous verdicts, and everyone's desire to get out of jury duty.
He recommends that we return to the Athenian method of sortition, aka the drawing of lots. Appointing (certain) officials in the same way we create juries would be far more democratic and would also increase engagement. Van Reybrouk provides several examples, both ancient and modern, where aleatoric methods have been incorporated into decision making.
The book does a good job making me question unexamined assumptions about democratic governance, and it describes the current crisis well (especially for Europe, since the author is Belgian). I find the recommendations less convincing. None of the modern examples, such as revising the Icelandic constitution or Canadian electoral reform, was an unqualified success. The description of van Reybrouk's preferred system sounds like the summary of an alien civilization. After pointing to jury selection as a model, the author should have explicitly addressed the problems in that system such as unrepresentative juries, outrageous verdicts, and everyone's desire to get out of jury duty.
No comments:
Post a Comment