"In a democracy, the real power should be with the people, not the positions they aim to occupy." — Anonymous
Imagine a world where political power isn't awarded to the champion of an electoral battle, but instead bestowed randomly to a citizen through the draw of their name. A world devoid of professional politicians, where your neighbor, your teacher, or even your local mailman have an equal chance of stepping into a role of governance. While it may seem like a fantastical utopia, it was a reality in ancient Athens through a process called sortition.
Sortition refers to the selection of political representatives through a lottery system. It's rooted deeply in the origins of democracy, where it served as the foundation of governmental appointment in ancient Athens. In this society, many judicial and administrative positions were filled by this method.
The Revival of Sortition: Global Experiments
Sortition didn't fade with history. In recent decades, nations across the globe have revisited this ancient practice. In the 2010s, Ireland became a notable example, utilizing randomly selected groups to tackle constitutional questions, including the pivotal topic of abortion. Similarly, in 2012, Iceland explored constitutional amendments through the deliberations of randomly chosen citizens.
From 2000 onward, Europe alone has witnessed the establishment of 105 randomly selected groups at various governmental levels. This resurgence indicates a growing interest in the potential reforms sortition might offer. However, the essence of this discussion is not just where sortition has been, but where it might lead us.
Sortition in Student Government: A Case Study
Within the microcosm of student government, sortition presents a revolutionary opportunity. Driven by this potential, myself and a small group of students have embarked on a journey to introduce sortition within the William and Mary Student Assembly—a venture met with both intrigue and resistance.
Implementing sortition isn't without its challenges. It demands reimagining democracy, questioning the reliability of a system that's been in place for centuries. Yet, with only 28% of Americans currently believing in the effectiveness of democracy, the call for change is evident. Globally, similar sentiments echo across Europe, where political engagement and voter turnout continue to decline. Therefore, if we are to innovate, student governments stand as ideal testing grounds—low stakes yet high in visibility.
Interestingly, the 2014 Bolivian initiative demonstrated the benefits of adopting sortition in a school setting. Students there displayed a remarkable preference for lotteries over traditional elections, with 75% favoring sortition and 97% endorsing its expansion into other institutions. Their enthusiasm beckons a deeper investigation into the appeal of such a system.
The Inefficiency of Elections
Historically, elections have been seen as the gateway to leadership, presumably selecting the brightest and most capable among us. The American founding fathers held the premise that elections would elevate virtuous individuals from the "natural aristocracy" to positions of power. However, the true essence of elections lies in their favor for those adept at campaigning—a skill set distinct from that required for effective governance.
Campaigning demands organizational prowess, dedication, and a strong work ethic, but it often rewards traits associated with charisma and ambition. Concerningly, it also attracts those with the dark triad of personality traits: Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and narcissism. Such traits have been linked to political ambition and electoral success, suggesting that elections may not truly filter for the best and brightest. Instead, they favor "natural politicians"—individuals more involved in their political ascent than the welfare of their constituents.
Expanding the Representative Pool
Sortition radically expands the pool of potential representatives by incorporating those who desire to serve but shy away from the politicking inherent in campaigning. By doing so, legislative bodies become more cohesive, efficient, and virtuous. Additionally, removing the electoral process eradicates the influence of campaign financing, which often skews representation towards the affluent.
Critics of sortition frequently raise concerns about competency. It's understandable; trusting governance to randomly selected individuals seems risky. Yet, for every less capable individual, there's another pursuing advanced degrees or contributing significantly to society in some unsung manner. Wisdom of the crowd, a long-standing concept, supports the idea that collective decision-making often outperforms that of isolated experts.
Psychologists argue the necessity of cognitive diversity, which allows groups to draw on a broader spectrum of opinions and ideas—often outperforming more homogeneous, albeit seemingly competent, groups. Contrast this with the current composition of the U.S. Congress, where lawyer-heavy representation deters cognitive diversity and, consequently, legislative efficacy.
The Proficiency of Cognitive Diversity
Effective governance requires more than specialized knowledge or individual expertise. The task is so multifaceted that no single background can suffice. This complexity often leads officials to seek external advice and lobbyist influence in policy formation—a clear indication of the need for cognitive diversity in decision-making bodies.
While direct democracy offers an alternative, it harbors the threat of mob rule, lacking the moderation that sortition could provide. Randomly selected representatives possess real motivations for compromise since they embody varying backgrounds and ideas, not seasoned politicians chasing sensationalism.
Transforming Student Representation
Though student governments differ from national legislatures, the potential benefits of sortition remain immense. Imbalances persist in student representation: majorities in STEM fields at William and Mary remain underrepresented in their Student Senate. Similarly, student athletes lack representation altogether. By embracing sortition, we could witness a renaissance in student governance.
In Bolivia, randomly chosen student governments shifted focus from social events to more structural initiatives such as building libraries and opposing human trafficking. Such diversity in governance enhances institutional capacity by broadening the scope of representation and innovation.
Conclusion: A Call for Courageous Change
Innovation within governance demands courage—an openness to venturing beyond comfort zones into uncharted territory for potential improvement. Sortition isn't without flaws, but its trial is necessary for any meaningful reform. Institutions like William and Mary, steeped in history, are perfect incubators for such experimentation.
As the birthplace of American democracy, William and Mary stands poised once again to be a frontrunner in democratic innovation. Perfection must not stifle progress, for inaction amid evident dysfunction is the greater threat. In critical times, it is not the politicians, the electoral processes, or even long-standing institutions that bear ultimate responsibility. It is the empowered citizenry—the community itself.
"Have the courage to empower your neighbor, for they may just lead us to a better tomorrow."
Additional System Comment
- [x] Finished task
- [ ] Non-finished task
For further reading on the application of sortition in modern governance, consider exploring these articles and case studies.
POLITICAL SYSTEM, GOVERNANCE INNOVATION, CITIZEN EMPOWERMENT, SORTITION, COGNITIVE DIVERSITY, DEMOCRACY, ELECTIONS, STUDENT GOVERNMENT, YOUTUBE