Abstract
AbstractThis paper looks at Alexander Guerrero’s epistemic case for ‘lottocracy’, or government by randomly selected citizen assemblies. It argues that Guerrero fails to show that citizen expertise is more likely to be elicited and brought to bear on democratic politics if we replace elections with random selection. However, randomly selected citizen assemblies can be valuable deliberative and participative additions to elected and appointed institutions even when citizens are not bearers of special knowledge or virtue individually or collectively.
Funder
HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference52 articles.
1. Abizadeh, Arash. 2020. Representation, bicameralism, political equality, and sortition: Reconstituting the second chamber as a randomly selected assembly. Perspectives on Politics, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592719004626
2. Achen, Christopher H., and Larry M. Bartels. 2016. Democracy for realists: Why elections do not produce responsive government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400882731
3. Bagg, Samuel. 2018. The power of the multitude: Answering epistemic challenges to democracy. American Political Science Review 112 (4): 891–904. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055418000527
4. Beerbohm, Eric. 2012. In our name: The ethics of democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5. Bellantoni, Alessandro, Claudia Chwalisz, and Leva Cesnulaityte. 2020. Good practice principles for deliberative processes for public decision making. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/gov/open-government/good-practice-principles-for-deliberative-processes-for-public-decision-making.pdf
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献