This episode of Freakonomics Radio explores the radical idea of replacing elections with sortition—randomly selecting lawmakers like jury duty—to create more representative and less corrupt governance. Advocates argue elections incentivize narcissism and partisanship, while citizens' assemblies produce smarter, more deliberative policy outcomes.
Summarized by Podsumo
The U.S. midterm elections highlight deep dissatisfaction: 43% of voters dislike both parties, and roughly half of eligible voters don't vote.
Sortition, used in ancient Athens, fills public offices by lottery rather than elections, aiming to reduce power-seeking and increase demographic representativeness.
Citizens' assemblies in Ireland, France, and British Columbia have successfully tackled polarizing issues like same-sex marriage, abortion, and climate change, though their recommendations are often non-binding.
Proponents like Yale professor Hélène Landemore and activist Terry Bouricius argue that random selection produces more diverse, deliberative, and trustworthy policymaking than elections.
A pilot citizens' assembly in Connecticut on property taxes demonstrated that randomly selected citizens can generate thoughtful, common-sense reforms.
"The Greeks were right. They knew that you shouldn't give power to people who want power."
"Elections are like an addiction. The ego thrust. People enjoy it more than they should."
"If you compare the quality of deliberation, you could say that they do better than politicians."