participatory DEMOCRACY – citizens’ assembly – egalitarian representation -random conventions – epistemic practices



wiki/sortition – In governance, sortition (also known as selection by lottery, selection by lot, allotment, demarchy, stochocracy, aleatoric democracy and lottocracy) is the selection of political officials as a random sample from a larger pool of candidates.[1] Sortition is generally used for filling individual posts or, more usually in its modern applications, to fill collegiate chambers.[citation needed] The system intends to ensure that all competent and interested parties have an equal chance of holding public office. It also minimizes factionalism, since there would be no point making promises to win over key constituencies if one was to be chosen by lot, while elections, by contrast, foster it.[2] In ancient Athenian democracy, sortition was the traditional and primary method for appointing political officials, and its use was regarded as a principal characteristic of democracy. Today, sortition is commonly used to select prospective jurors in common-law systems and is sometimes used in forming citizen groups with political advisory power.

> Political Theory
Politics and International RelationsPhilosophyPolitical Philosophy / gg/pdf 7-2022 Democratic Multiplicity – Perceiving, Enacting, and Integrating Democratic Diversity

Edited by James TullyUniversity of Victoria, British ColumbiaKeith CherryUniversity of AlbertaFonna FormanUniversity of California, San DiegoJeanne MorefieldUniversity of OxfordJoshua NicholsMcGill University, MontréalPablo OuzielUniversity of SouthamptonDavid OwenUniversity of SouthamptonOliver SchmidtkeUniversity of Victoria, British Columbia

Democratic Multiplicity
This edited volume argues that democracy is broader and more diverse than the dominant state-centered, modern representative democracies to which other modes of democracy are either presumed subordinate or ignored. The contributors seek to overcome the standard opposition of democracy from below (participatory) and democracy from above (representative). Rather, they argue that through differently situated participatory and representative practices, citizens and governments can develop democratic ways of cooperating without hegemony and subordination, and that these relationships can be transformative. This work proposes a slow but sure, nonviolent, ecosocial and sustainable process of democratic generation and growth with the capacity to critique and transform unjust and ecologically destructive social systems. This volume integrates human-centric democracies into a more mutual, interdependent and sustainable system on earth whereby everyone gains. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

James Tully is Professor Emeritus of Political Science and Law at the University of Victoria.

Keith Cherry is Postdoctoral Fellow of Law at the University of Alberta.

Fonna Forman is Professor of Political Science and Founding Director of the Center on Global Justice at the University of California, San Diego.

Jeanne Morefield is Associate Professor of Political Theory at the University of Oxford, Fellow at New College, and Non-Residential Fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

Joshua Nichols is Assistant Professor of Law at McGill University.

Pablo Ouziel is cofounder of the Cedar Trees Institute and Associate Fellow with the Centre for Global Studies at the University of Victoria.

David Owen is Professor of Social and Political Philosophy at the University of Southampton.

Oliver Schmidtke is Professor of Political Science and Director of the Centre for Global Studies at the University of Victoria.

> Gaia democracyeco-democraticsuccessionbeing the changeparticipatory democracycivic engagementdemocratic crisesKropotkinmutual aidGandhi 7-2022 – On Gaia Democracies from Part VI – Joining Hands: Eco-Democratic Integration – By James Tully

Summary – To respond to the ecological, social and democratic crises we face we need to realize that participatory democracy is the necessary permaculture of healthy representative and accountable democracies. Democracy is brought into being and generated by being democratic here and now in everyday relations. And, for all types of democracies to be sustainable they have to be integrated into the “mutual aid” or “gift-gratitude-reciprocity” relations of biodiversity by which life sustains life on this planet: Gaia or Earth democracy. The coordination and integration of democratic diversity set out in this volume has the capacity to bring about eco-democratic succession, modelled on ecological succession, as the alternative to failed reform and revolution.

search>random selection democracy 2019–does-random-selection-make-democracies.htm

youtube 2018 Alexander Guerrero lays out a plan for “lottocracy” — a new form of government in which adult citizens would be randomly selected to serve as lawmakers.

youtub/ted 2018 Brett Hennig presents a compelling case for sortition democracy, or random selection of government officials — a system with roots in ancient Athens that taps into the wisdom of the crowd and entrusts ordinary people with making balanced decisions for the greater good of everyone. Sound crazy? Learn more about how it could work to create a world free of partisan politics.

theguardian. 2012 Improbable research: why random selection of MPs may be best – Mathematical research indicates that parliaments work best when some, though not all, members are chosen at random – by Marc Abrahams

Democracies would be better off if they chose some of their politicians at random. That’s the word, mathematically obtained, from a team of Italian physicists, economists, and political analysts. The team includes the trio whose earlier research showed, also mathematically, that bureaucracies would be more efficient if they promoted people at random.

Alessandro Pluchino, Andrea Rapisarda, Cesare Garofalo, and two other colleagues at the University of Catania in Sicily published their new study in a physics journal called Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications. The study itself is titled Accidental Politicians: How Randomly Selected Legislators Can Improve Parliament Efficiency. 2010 Mini-publics: assemblies by random selection – by Graham Smith

This chapter turns our attention to democratic innovations that are distinguished by their mode of selecting citizens, namely random selection. Random selection has a long democratic heritage: it was the preferred method for selecting positions of political authority in the Athenian polis and continued to play a part in republican thought and practice throughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance and into the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (Manin 1997). Given this democratic heritage it is perhaps surprising that it has played little or no role in contemporary political systems, where selection by competitive elections is generally perceived to be the democratic method of choice for positions of political authority. The most prominent exception to this rule is the randomly selected jury used in a number of legal systems in advanced industrial democracies: ‘an obligation which may in principle fall upon any citizen, is almost the sole vestige of direct citizen participation in law-making and administration which survives in modern democracies’ (Arblaster 1994: 18).

Within the Athenian political system, lot and rotation governed the selection of magistrates, the council and the pool of volunteers for juries – all highly significant positions of political authority. As a selection mechanism, lot and rotation gave full expression to the principle of democratic citizenship by providing the occasion for citizens to rule and be ruled in turn: ‘For Aristotle, this alternation between command and obedience even constituted the virtue or excellence of citizens’ (Manin 1997: 28).

> Political Theory, Political Sociology, Politics and International Relations, Comparative Politics, Sociology, Theories of Institutional Design 14-5-2022 Just 10% of global land in natural state by 2050 without action, says biodiversity expert -First session of Citizens’ Assembly on Biodiversity Loss sits at Dublin Castle

…”Addressing the first session of the Citizens’ Assembly on Biodiversity Loss sitting in Dublin Castle on Saturday, he said humans needed food, water, energy and timber from the land, but urgently needed to transform associated production systems. …

…”Assembly chair Dr Aoibhinn Ní Shúilleabháin acknowledged the richness of Irish biodiversity, but did not want people to believe there was a global crisis “and everything is fine here”.

The Assembly would undertake a six-month programme of work, she confirmed, and called on participants and people outside the Assembly to “engage with its work in order to confront Ireland’s climate and biodiversity emergency declared in 2019”. This could be done by tuning into proceedings online and making submissions. She said the Assembly would seek to address the fundamental issue …”… 2018 The Irish abortion referendum: How a Citizens’ Assembly helped to break years of political deadlock – by Michela Palese

Citizens’AssembyProjectTeam 2018 The myth of the citizens’ assembly – It worked in Ireland but it won’t solve Brexit – by Naomi O’Leary

“Put 100 ordinary citizens in a room and together they will solve the most intractable political problems of our time and save democracy in the process. If only things were so simple. Citizens’ assemblies, in which ordinary people are entrusted to carefully consider evidence on an issue and deliver policy recommendations, are the flavor of the month among political geeks across the world. Rory Stewart, one of the Tories vying to be the United Kingdom’s next prime minister, is proposing one to solve Brexit. President Emmanuel Macron has promised a grand débat national to involve the public directly in his efforts to reform France through citizens’ assemblies, online consultations and local meetups. The parliament of Belgium’s German-speaking community has set up a structure to include citizens’ assemblies in its decision-making on a permanent basis. Similar efforts are popping up everywhere from Sydney to Madrid to Gdańsk…”…

back to top

participation – debate, deliberation, decision making pdf 2022  A look at citizen participation during COVID-19 in the city of Pinar del Río Yusmila Adalina Hernández  Fernández, Hany Raisely Pérez Bruno

…”…Building citizenship is promoting the active participation of people in the construction and transformation of the society in which they live according to their interests and needs.(Camacho, 2001, p. 79). To participate is to belong to a whole that understands and has theparticipantinmind. It happens to be an activeentity, feeling with possibilities to do, contributeand decide. According to Gabriel Gyarmati, participation is the real and ffective capacity of the in-dividual or a group to make decisions on matters that directly or indirectly affect their life and activities in society (Krause, 2002, p.) … To what limits does citizen participation go and how it reverts in a moment of crisis, is a matter for reflection …”… PDF 2021 A realist epistemic utopia? Epistemic practices in a climate camp – by Justo Serrano Zamora, Lisa Herzog

INTRODUCTION : Participatory democratic practices are often seen as caught between two ideals: inclusiveness and efficiency. On the one hand, they are meant to provide “democratic deepening” by using inclusive processes and giving everyone a voice; on the other hand, they are expected to deliver good results (Gilman, 2012). But can one have both at once? Can deliberation be more than an “endless meeting” (Polletta, 2004)? And can the positive epistemic potentials of deliberation (Landemore, 2013, chap. 4) and other forms of political participation be unlocked in practice?

In this paper, we discuss a case study that provides reason for cautious optimism: practices of deliberative decision-making and task distribution in a 2019 “climate camp” in Germany. Here, radical ideals of democratic inclusion and horizontality2 came up against practical imperatives of efficiency with regard to the day-to-day organization of the camp. We analyze in detail how the participants in this camp dealt with two kinds of tension: the tension between the use of differential knowledge and the risk of thereby creating hierarchies; and the tension between participatory practices and imperatives of efficiency, which, as noted at the outset, has often been seen as a challenge for deliberative participatory practices.

We argue that through a number of strategies, the participants of the camp managed to overcome these tensions, with the strategies for overcoming the former tension also helping to overcome the second one. We also discuss what this—admittedly very specific—setting can tell us about deliberative practices more generally speaking. Our paper is situated at the intersection of two sets of literature. First, we draw on ideas from deliberative democratic theory (Cohen, 1989; Gutman & Thomson, 2004; Parkinson & Mansbridge, 2012; Young, 2001) and the literature on the epistemic advantages of democratic practices (Anderson, 2006; Landemore, 2013). Many deliberative democrats have pointed out thatsocial movements can be arenas of democratic deliberation (e.g., Dryzek, 2000; Fraser, 1990).

Here, our contribution is to discuss a real-life example, based on ethnographic work of how the epistemic potentials of democratic deliberation can be unlocked, turning it into a positive factor for efficient problem-solving. But we also make explicit that this requires a specific attitude and set of practices that are usually not included in the abstract ideal of deliberation.
Second, our case study also speaks to the literature on participatory democracy (Menser, 2018) and social movement studies (e.g., Della Porta, 2009; Felicetti, 2016; Leach, 2016; Maeckelbergh, 2009; Mansbridge, 1983; Polletta, 2004; Sitrin, 2012). Here, our original contribution follows from focusing on the epistemic tensions of democratic participation. While most of the available research focuses on the problems concerning the effective realization of democratic ideals and reaching consensus, we focus on successful strategies and mechanisms by which the participants deal with knowledge under radically democratic conditions.

In the next section (Section 2), we describe our case study and the ideals of horizontality and inclusion it tried to realize in more detail. We then turn to its epistemic practices, identifying some of the mechanisms and strategies through which the inegalitarian effects of epistemic hierarchies, such as unequal knowledge, are avoided (Section 3.1). This is followed by a discussion of how the second tension, between inclusion and efficiency, was overcome (Section 3.2). We also critically discuss whether the lessons learned from this case can be generalized (Section 4).

In the conclusion (Section 5), we summarize our results: our case study shows that epistemic practices which successfully combine strong democratic ideals of horizontality and efficiency are possible. To this extent, we can describe the epistemic practices of this climate camp as “real epistemic utopias.”

back to top

collective intentionality – research 2021 Habitual Behavior: Bridging the Gap between I-Intentionality and We-Intentionality – by Raffaela Giovagnoli

The central question of the debate on We- intentionality or Collective Intentionality is how to grasp the relationship between individuals and collectives. We’ll briefly introduce the debate and the theoretical aspects of this complex issue. Moreover, we suggest to investigate habitual behavior that represents a fundamental part of the nature of human beings in both individual and social contexts. 2022 The Journal of Social Ontology

About the Journal : The Journal of Social Ontology (JSO) is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to social ontology and collective intentionality that was founded in 2015. It is supported by International Social Ontology Society and the University of Vienna. JSO features scholarly work pertaining to the basic structures of the social world from a variety of disciplinary perspectives including moral, social and political philosophy, anthropology, cognitive science, economics, history, law, political science, and psychology. The topics that JSO covers range from small-scale everyday interactions to encompassing societal institutions, from expert teams to hierarchical organizations, and from unintended consequences to institutional design. The journal provides a forum for exchanges between scholars of diverse disciplinary and methodological backgrounds. In addition to major articles, JSO publishes review essays, discussion articles, and book reviews.


  • Social ontology and collective intentionality
  • Basic structures of the social world
  • Interdisciplinary perspective including moral, social and political philosophy, sociology, anthropology, cognitive science, human sciences, economics, history, law, political science, and psychology

back to top

real exisisting- history of- democracy 2018 Can Democracy Work?: A Short History of a Radical Idea, from Ancient Athens to Our World – by James Miller 2020 Capitalism Versus Democracy? Rethinking Politics in the Age of Environmental Crisis by Boris Frankel

Abstract: For over 150 years, political strategies and policies have been formed according to whether parties and movements believed that capitalism is either compatible or incompatible with democracy. This book challenges both supporters and opponents of the ‘compatibility’ thesis and calls for a rethink of politics in the age of environmental crisis. It is divided into three parts. Part One critically questions the dominant narratives and assumptions held by many of the broad Left about the origins, causes and alternatives to our present condition. Part Two focuses on how prominent neo-Keynesians and Marxists have explained the crises of the past decade and why they are still operating with essentially pre-environmentalist conceptions of the conflict between ‘capitalism and democracy’. Part Three offers one of the first detailed discussions of what kind of organisational, political economic and cultural issues that advocates of alternative post-carbon or post-capitalist societies will need to confront. In a penetrating critique of how the tensions between ‘democracy and sustainability’ have impacted the old debates over capitalism versus democracy, the author examines proposals and images of the ‘good life’ put forward by social democrats, greens, radical technological utopians, green growth ecological modernisers and degrowthers. Are the broadly held goals of greater social justice, ending poverty and inequality within and between affluent countries and low and middle-income societies possible without transgressing the fragile and damaged biophysical life support boundaries of the earth? Why is it that many who dispute the compatibility or incompatibility of ‘capitalism and democracy’ are yet to fully consider what policies, organisational forms and social changes flow from populations that favour democracy but oppose policies committed to greater environmental sustainability? These and many other issues are discussed in this unsettling new book which aims to stimulate us to rethink how we see our existing societies and future social, economic and political change. 7-5-2022 A call to arms for diverse democracies and their ‘decent middle’ Democracy? Martin Wolf on Yasha Mounk’s The Great Experiment

Yasha Mounk The Great Experiment - Democracy  Martin Wolf  5-2022 10-4-2022 Young adults have dramatic loss of faith in UK democracy, survey reveals – Report says sidelining of parliament by Tory government has further eroded trust in political system – by Toby Helm 2022 Corporate sedition is more damaging to America than the Capitol attack – Kyrsten Sinema receives millions from business and opposes progressive priorities. Republicans who voted to overturn an election still bag big bucks. Whose side are CEOs on? – by Robert Reich 2020 Democracy For Sale: Dark Money and Dirty Politics – by Peter Geoghegan

‘If you’re concerned about the health of British democracy, read this book – it is thorough, gripping and vitally important’ Oliver Bullough, author of Moneyland.

Democracy is in crisis, and unaccountable and untraceable flows of money are helping to destroy it. Politicians lie gleefully, making wild claims that can be shared instantly with millions of people on social media. Donald Trump, Boris Johnson, Jair Bolsonaro and populists in many other countries are the beneficiaries. Peter Geoghegan is a diligent, brilliant guide through a shadowy world of dark money and digital disinformation stretching from Westminster to Washington, and far beyond. He shows how antiquated electoral laws are broken with impunity, how secretive lobbying bends our politics out of shape, and how Silicon Valley tech giants have colluded in selling out democracy. Geoghegan investigates politicians, fabulously well-funded partisan think tanks, propagandists who know how to game a rigged system, and the campaigners and regulators valiantly trying to stop them. Democracy for Sale is the story of how money, vested interests and digital skulduggery are eroding trust in democracy – and a powerful account of what must be done about it. 8-2020 Democracy for Sale by Peter Geoghegan review – the end of politics as we know it? The openDemocracy journalist delves into the web of power, money and data manipulation that is bringing our electoral system to its knees – by John Naughton 7-2021 Democracy Rules by Jan-Werner Müller – “Stopping the rot” 6-2021 Democracy Is for Losers (and Why That’s a Good Thing) By Jennifer Szalai


youtube 2016 Capitalism will eat democracy — unless we speak up – Yanis Varoufakis

back to top

Leave a Reply