more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
The drawing of lots, the most democratic of all political instruments, lost out in the eighteenth century to elections, a procedure that was not invented as a democratic instrument, but as a means of bringing a new non-hereditary aristocracy to power.
Gist of Idea
In the 18th century democratic lots lost out to elections, that gave us a non-hereditary aristocracy
Source
David van Reybrouck (Against Elections [2013], 3 'democratisation')
Book Ref
Reybrouck,David van: 'Against Elections', ed/tr. Waters,Liz [Bodley Head 2016], p.104
A Reaction
This is the basic thesis of Van Reybrouck's book. He argues for the extensive use of lots ('sortition') for getting people involved in modern democracies. I love the idea that in a good democracy you get an occasional chance to rule.
| 20086 | Nowadays sovereignty (once the basis of a state) has become relative [Reybrouck] |
| 20085 | Democracy is the best compromise between legitimacy and efficiency [Reybrouck] |
| 20089 | Technocrats may be efficient, but they lose legitimacy as soon as they do unpopular things [Reybrouck] |
| 20090 | Today it seems almost impossible to learn the will of the people [Reybrouck] |
| 20087 | There are no united monolothic 'peoples', and no 'national gut feelings' [Reybrouck] |
| 20088 | Technocrats are expert managers, who replace politicians, and can be long-term and unpopular [Reybrouck] |
| 20093 | In the 18th century democratic lots lost out to elections, that gave us a non-hereditary aristocracy [Reybrouck] |
| 20091 | Representative elections were developed in order to avoid democracy [Reybrouck] |
| 20094 | You don't really govern people if you don't involve them [Reybrouck] |
| 20095 | A referendum result arises largely from ignorance [Reybrouck] |