Your conditions are impossible. Who can prove such a vague scheme cannot work? Vague as in the uncertainties associated with lotteries. Vague in its presumptions as to the outcomes from the randomly selected and so on.
Any form of human organisation can 'work'. We need a definition for what is 'working' and against 'not working'.
For instance western corrupt ramshackle 'democracies' work right now despite having a terrible lopsidedness of wealth.
It could well be that lopsidedness could work to our advantage were it deliberately utilised rather than largely unaddressed.
And the 'unaddressed' is because of the apathy of those that, within the current system, ostensibly, are supposed to address it: the population.
Hence our system is simply not being used. It is like a car with a motor not switched on.
Let the people do what they should and our system currently 'working' whilst including a growing inequality, would work even better.
The very heart of your difficult to understand system appears to be random selection of individuals to 'care' or concern themselves with government.
This is precisely the opposite of what is required which is that ALL individuals should educate themselves and be educated to care and concern themselves.
The problem is that people are ignored. Quite simply ignored.
All the powerful and all the observer pundits simply ignore people.
Ukraine conflict is a supremely beautiful text book example of this. For example the universal use of the words 'Ukraine' and 'Ukrainian' is to have them apply to 'Kiev Ukraine' and 'Kiev Ukrainians'. 10 million Donbas Ukrainians simply don't exist. Do not figure in the reports,the prognostication, the analysis, the commentaries.... nothing.
That's how easy it is today for people to be 'omitted'.
40,000 - some say more than 100,000 Palestinians have been 'omitted' forever and it troubles, essentially, no one.
The people are not consulted, not considered. Govts and pundits alike believe it is only necessary for they to talk within the closed circles of their peers for all to be done.
This suggestion of yours exacerbates that situation, apparently. Seeming to suggest the people need do nothing at all, the mechanism, the lottery, fate itself, will organise everything.
It seems in that sense to be essentially unhuman. Robotic.
Aren't you there endorsing Trump and conservative Parties in general throughout the U.S. empire? The political right has ALWAYS been representing ONLY the aristocracy — so, a ‘right-wing democracy’ is a self-contradiction: democracy can exist ONLY in a country that authentically has equality before the law — NO one is above the law (there IS no aristocracy). So: how can that -- what you endorse -- be as you say, a "real solution"?
Your conditions are impossible. Who can prove such a vague scheme cannot work? Vague as in the uncertainties associated with lotteries. Vague in its presumptions as to the outcomes from the randomly selected and so on.
Any form of human organisation can 'work'. We need a definition for what is 'working' and against 'not working'.
For instance western corrupt ramshackle 'democracies' work right now despite having a terrible lopsidedness of wealth.
It could well be that lopsidedness could work to our advantage were it deliberately utilised rather than largely unaddressed.
And the 'unaddressed' is because of the apathy of those that, within the current system, ostensibly, are supposed to address it: the population.
Hence our system is simply not being used. It is like a car with a motor not switched on.
Let the people do what they should and our system currently 'working' whilst including a growing inequality, would work even better.
The very heart of your difficult to understand system appears to be random selection of individuals to 'care' or concern themselves with government.
This is precisely the opposite of what is required which is that ALL individuals should educate themselves and be educated to care and concern themselves.
The problem is that people are ignored. Quite simply ignored.
All the powerful and all the observer pundits simply ignore people.
Ukraine conflict is a supremely beautiful text book example of this. For example the universal use of the words 'Ukraine' and 'Ukrainian' is to have them apply to 'Kiev Ukraine' and 'Kiev Ukrainians'. 10 million Donbas Ukrainians simply don't exist. Do not figure in the reports,the prognostication, the analysis, the commentaries.... nothing.
That's how easy it is today for people to be 'omitted'.
40,000 - some say more than 100,000 Palestinians have been 'omitted' forever and it troubles, essentially, no one.
The people are not consulted, not considered. Govts and pundits alike believe it is only necessary for they to talk within the closed circles of their peers for all to be done.
This suggestion of yours exacerbates that situation, apparently. Seeming to suggest the people need do nothing at all, the mechanism, the lottery, fate itself, will organise everything.
It seems in that sense to be essentially unhuman. Robotic.
Democracy? You mean where the 51% get to tell the other 49% how things will be? No thanks.
‘Replacing elections with lotteries is the only way I can think of to get us out of the present situation …’
Eric:
A crapshoot? Really? How does this bring the man on the street into the stream of civic events?
Is this written tongue-in-cheek? I’m surprised you came up with this.
A revolution is one possible solution. With the current system being replaced by a meritocratic system.
The only real solution is to eliminate all self-styled "Progressives" and return to historical Westernal ethos.
Aren't you there endorsing Trump and conservative Parties in general throughout the U.S. empire? The political right has ALWAYS been representing ONLY the aristocracy — so, a ‘right-wing democracy’ is a self-contradiction: democracy can exist ONLY in a country that authentically has equality before the law — NO one is above the law (there IS no aristocracy). So: how can that -- what you endorse -- be as you say, a "real solution"?
"The only real solution is to eliminate all self-styled "Progressives" and return to historical Westernal ethos."
How would they be eliminated?
The way an extreme conservative would like to do. It definitely WOULDN'T be by democracy.