The Democratic Pedigree of Random Selection

Bibliographic Data

ID3849993
AuthorsJohn Gastil (0000-0002-0337-1064, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume30
Issue2
Pages182-193
Publication date2024-05-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueCommon Knowledge (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0961-754X • E-ISSN: 1538-4578
PublisherDuke University Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1215/0961754x-11236662
OpenAlexW4404754753
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited17

As part of the ongoing Common Knowledge symposium "Antipolitics," this essay replies to an article by Nadia Urbinati: "The Sovereignty of Chance: Can Lottery Save Democracy?" Urbinati's piece expresses reservations about the tendency of symposium contributions to support what she terms "lottocracy." Gastil's response argues (1) that random selection in politics can take many forms, none of which need resemble a lottocracy; (2) that a randomly selected body with some measure of influence or authority can complement electoral democracy without replacing it; (3) that prohibiting democracies from experimenting with random selection would undermine their claim to being democratic; and (4) that evidence from experience with random selection warrants continuing to experiment with it as a means of revitalizing imperiled democratic systems

Democracy · Mathematical economics · Political science · Academic Freedom and Politics · Computer Science · Law · Mathematics · Media Influence and Politics · Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence · Artificial Intelligence

Tools

Open DOI