Sortition is the method of random selection, particularly in relation to the selection of decision makers also known as allotment.
Today, sortition is fairly commonly used in small groups (e.g., picking a school class monitor), but only rarely in relation to public decision making positions, where methods based on election are much more common. The only widespread example of public decision making positions filled in this way are court juries.
However, there are historical examples (for example classical Athens and Venice) where sortition was used to select the holders of key political and administrative offices, sometimes combined with an element of qualification or election. Moreover, some contemporary thinkers advocate greater use of the method in today’s political systems.
The selection method should be carefully designed in order to preserve public confidence that it has not been rigged. One robust, general, public method for making random selections is RFC 3797: Publicly Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection. Using it, multiple specific sources of random numbers (e.g. lotteries) are selected in advance, and an algorithm is defined for selecting the winners based on those random numbers. When the random numbers become available, anyone can calculate the winners.
Aristotle's appreciation of the power of sortition to reduce the influence of money in politics is still relevant. Critics of electoral politics in the twenty-first century make a similar argument—that because the process of election by vote is subject to manipulation by money and other powerful forces, legislative elections are a less representative system than selection by lot from among the population.
According to Xenophon (Memorabilia Book I, 2.9), this classical argument was offered by Socrates:
The same argument is also made by Edmund Burke in his essay Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790):
This is essentially an aristocratic or professionalist argument preferring the rule of a select few over the rule of the average citizen. A similar argument can be made (and was often made) against universal suffrage.
Additional arguments against sortition:
Selection by sortition has a drawback that resembles one of the philosophical objections to the military draft (selective service)—namely, that it is less respectful of individual autonomy than is a system based on voluntary choice to serve. A system of sortition could be adjusted to address this by allowing selected but unwilling individuals simply to "opt out", but this would seem to compromise the purely random nature of the selection system.
A final argument against sortition is that, even if one accepts that the method could be just as successful as election at capturing the "will of the people", there is a positive value in offering the people the right to engage with public policy and express their views on it, by means of casting a vote. A related argument is that, because voting expresses the "consent of the governed", voting is able to confer a legitimacy that no random selection device could ever achieve. One reply might be that, under sortition, the "governed" have given their overall consent to their representatives up front by expressing their will to consent to the sortition system.
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the
"Sortition".
Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world