Representative Democracy
An indirect form of Democracy in which representatives are elected to govern on behalf of an electorate for a fixed or maximum period of time.

Sortition
The random selectioning of citizens representative of an electorate as a whole. Notably, modern techniques of computer assisted “sortitioning” enable the  collecting together of groups of citizens which are, meaningfully, a 100%  reflection of the compositional characteristics of all citizens within any given electorate.

Deliberative Forums
Larger or smaller groups of citizens convening to consider and discuss subject matters, and report agreed and / or various and minority conclusions reached. Typical examples include Citizens Assemblies, which may comprise quite large groups of 100 or more citizens, or Juries comprising perhaps 10 or 15. The composition of deliberative forums may be self-chosen groups or sortitioned, and access to expertise and evidence may be orchestrated to facilitate discussion and decision making.

Deliberative Democracy
In this paper we will take Deliberative Democracy to refer to an indirect form of Democracy in which representatives of all citizens are selected by Sortition to form Deliberative Forums, supported by evidence and expertise as may be agreed, and with governing powers to act on behalf of … all citizens.

…and, for clarity,

Democracy
The word is derived from the Greek “Demos”, meaning “people” and referring to people within a given state or jurisdiction, and “Kratos” meaning “power”. In this paper we’ll take Democracy to mean, in its fullest sense, “Government by the Citizenry”

Ancient (Western) Democracy and Logistics

In Ancient Athens the right and responsibility to vote was available to free men over 20 years old. The city was big for its time, with an electorate of about 30,000 and a total population ten times bigger, and in some periods assemblies for discussion and voting took place once a week.

If this ancient “Direct” Democracy had been legitimised by equitable enfranchishment the logistical challenges would perhaps have been beyond the city’s capacities, just because of the numbers of people and the support systems involved, and these challenges are greater now, with colossal cities and continental scale nations.

Decision Making in “Push Button” Direct Democracy

New technology suggests an alternative form of “Push Button” Direct Democracy - voting remote from each other, by computer or phone from our own homes or perhaps on the move, but problems arise in this type of system too, because, as we know, issues need to be thought about and understood to make good decisions, many of which are complex and don’t suit simple yes or no voting, and this decision making type, in which people can only vote between two extreme poles, between good and evil, are also particularly vulnerable to populist manipulation and, besides, 

our lives may be busy and we aren’t all experts in all matters, but the need for good decision making is constant.

Who do Representatives Represent?

Direct Democracy is rarely practiced today and if so, then only as a supplement, and this left us with Representative Democracy as the standard form in use globally.

The benefits of Representative Democracy - in theory choosing the best amongst us, in manageable numbers, permanently on duty discussing and developing expertise and, acting on everyone’s behalf - has a sense and meets logistical needs, but problems arise due to conflicts brought about by wealth acting upon the system. When the chances of success for parties and candidates at elections and the actions of representatives elected for numbers of years may be substantively influenced by the actions of wealth, then the system fails to meet basic tenets of Democratic Legitimacy. If, for example, you are obliged by ties to funders, whether through political  parties or as individuals, then the extent to which you are free to find agreement with other human beings may be limited, with the upshot that Parliaments are dominated by one group or another, neither looking nor finding agreements with each other or, in sclerosis and doing nothing – all of which misses the point of collective deliberation.

Added to all of this is the systemic ‘state of affairs’ perpetuated and endorsed by the vote. Simply, if elections alone provide democratic legitimacy, then democracy is not democratic enough.

Western Democratic Doxa

80% of humanity wants to live in a “Democracy” and, it is a widely suggested and believed that Representative Democracy is the least worst of governmental options available,

and yet,

hardly a word is said about the fact that better, fairer and more constructive forms of Democracy may be put in place.

It is usually those in power who are the loudest proponents of the existing system, typically offering comparison of (Representative) Democratic forms with those of Authoritarian Regimes, or engaging in distractive argument about the varieties of proportionality in electoral systems, or the numbers and composition of the chambers of representation - none of which helps us.

Regardless the sub type of Representative Democratic structure, discontent is rife amongst electorates, and unwanted, illegitimate outcomes commonplace, and as global Transparency and Rule of Law watchdogs evidence, anti corruption and rule of law Indices are moving the wrong way within many Western Democracies. 

The key thing for all of us to recognise is that the means to restore Democratic legitimacy are already available, and easy to see once we stop listening to messages being pushed by existing wealth and, in point of fact, we can draw more about fairer and more legitimate structures again from those of ancient Athens; notably, the council of 500”, in whose hands lay day to day political business, such as the supervision of civil servants, preliminary consultations for resolutions proposed by the people’s assembly, and decisioning on all ongoing domestic and foreign policy matters, were all chosen by sortition and, so too many administrative positions.

“Everyone chases after happiness, not noticing that happiness is right at their heels.” 

(Bertolt Brecht)

Sortition and Democratic Legitimacy

The most recent few decades have seen the emergence of two developments in Democratic theory and practice - developments relating to Sortition and to Deliberative Forums. Taken together these developments provide a simple and well evidenced basis for the enhancement and legitimisation of Democracies globally.

As mentioned Sortition is the process of random selectioning to form groups of people who, thanks to computer facilitated stratified sampling, will accurately mirror the character of a population as a whole and so, regardless of group size, the views of the group will always be a broad reflection of the views of the population.

So,

applying Sortition in democratic processes, we don’t need the whole electorate gathered together to work out what the views of the whole electorate are… 

if each citizen within a selected group just follows her or his own conscience when considering issues then electorates will know that across the group collectively the collected views of the electorate as a whole will be substantially represented - including their own,

and,

if these groups are gathered together for the purpose of voting on a single issue, and then disband, then this sorts out the problem of corrupt representation - because no one will be involved for a long time and, relatively speaking, lots of such randomly chosen citizens will be selected, which is precisely the necessary counterpoint to, for example, the highly problematic influence of party financing on political decision making.

Deliberative Forums and Good Decision Making

While the sortitioning of groups removes legitimacy and logistical problems, the use of Deliberative Forums address problems associated with good decision making in Push Button voting systems.

The Forums involve groups of citizens convening to consider and discuss subject matters, and report agreed and / or various and minority conclusions reached, and three basic organisational features underpin their effective use, 

- that they are structured to give “Deliberators” the time needed to properly consider issues,

- that access is made available to data, analysis and expertise as needed,

- and that they include periods where deliberators meet physically to discuss issues together,

and, so, provide a support basis for decision making similar to that which is provided to elected politicians and, just as politicians are not specialists but can draw upon expertise and are given time to help ensure good decision making across all issues, so too can sortitioned citizens.

Where Forums and Representative Houses (Parliaments) clearly differ is both in the speed with which sensible decision making may take place, and the quality of the collective deliberation because if Deliberators are selected to the Forums through Sortition, then they are not conflicted and, so, are free to reach agreements and make considered decisions with sensible speed, and

by further clear contrast,

it is a beauty of Deliberative Forums is that, while humans may all bring different starting opinions, when discussions can be enjoyed without conflict, with time in hand and on the basis of fair evidence and without the influence of money, they habitually tend to move towards consensus and agree sensible things - and that’d be really pretty good right now, … and, of course, forever.

Good Governance

The removal of the influence of wealth and the facilitation of unconflicted discourse and decisioning through the use of Sortitioned Deliberative Forums, provides the basis for transforming the structure of our democracies - 

the key is to give such Forums power - but, what power, what authority?

As a matter of democratic principle the design of new Constitutional frameworks could and should be shaped by Deliberating Citizens Assemblies drawing upon knowledge and thought from right across each Demos to agree best balance to new designs, and with designs varied to suit jurisdictional character and scales from local to regional and trans-national,

and,

just as a jury is not the only constituent part of a functioning law court, so Deliberative Forums could not sensibly be the only constituent part of a system of governance.

They are, of course, not suited to many of the functions required of governance systems as we may conceive them, and / or as currently existing - so, for example, it is not obvious that they can take on the role of a police force or a legal profession, and are not, perhaps or contendably, well suited to develop comprehensive policy programmes because of time issues - by tradition this is a role of Political Parties …though that could change.

Where the strengths and weaknesses of Deliberative Forums do point, is to their uses,

- as a means to provide the checks, balances and accountability to Representative Government and Watchdog systems that are manifestly missing, and,

- as sources of advice and inspiration from across full electorates to enhance the work of representatives within legislative systems, 

and,

since it is from Legislatures that reform to other governance structures usually flows, it is the legitimisation of our Legislatures that is fundamental.

A hybrid of Deliberative and Representative structures enhancing and legitimising our Democracies makes immediate sense. 

The Tetra Model – a Legislative Flow Diagram for a Hybrid Democracy - illustrating Institutions that might be created to augment a House of Representatives with Deliberative Forums.

- A Proposals Institute might be put in place - to provide a register of new ideas for legislation and to establish Deliberative Forums to generate and decide which ideas to formalise and send to Parliament as Legislative Initiatives.

- Consultative Forums might provide review and advice to representatives in respect of proposed laws.

- An Assent Institute might attest to the democratic legitimacy of all new law, by assenting draft laws into law, or, by referring drafts back to representatives for a rethink, or, subject to the constraint of agreed Super Majorities, by exercising a right of Veto.

- In this diagram Parliament is taken to refer to the principle Legislative Chamber, or Chambers, and it may be noted that the incorporation of Deliberative Democratic structures might substantively remove the benefit of any second legislative Chamber to the checks and balances of the system.

If the level of SuperMajorities was agreed appropriately then such an augmentation would prevent clearly undemocratic propositions progressing into law, while a Proposals Institute would provide an equitable and structured means for everyone to contribute to the making of new, democratically legitimised, law, and,

that’d enable peaceful pragmatic and, where agreed, total system transformation.