more on this theme | more from this text
Full Idea
Imagine having to develop a system today that would express the will of the people.
Gist of Idea
Today it seems almost impossible to learn the will of the people
Source
David van Reybrouck (Against Elections [2013], 2 'electoral')
Book Ref
Reybrouck,David van: 'Against Elections', ed/tr. Waters,Liz [Bodley Head 2016], p.55
A Reaction
Our recent Brexit referendum didn't do the job, because it was confined to a single question. Van Reybrouck laughs at the idea of expressing it through a polling both. How about a council of 500, drawn by lots? Meet for three months.
| 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] |