Method
As shown therefore CDRSB
proposals for the use of sortition are very different to
advocacy of 'deliberative polling' and suchlike practices
by Socialist International leaders. This is correspondingly
also the case in regard to the method of research and
conflict resolution we propose. As stated, upon the basis
of an analysis of the relation between politics and common
sense and the history of democracy three related principles
of socio-political organisation emerge as central to
conflict resolution between radicalism and conservatism on
a world historical scale: sortition, payment of ordinary
citizens to take part in political work and inheritance
tax. The last of these can serve as a point of departure,
because it is the failure of radicalism to address this
question upon soundly scientific premises which more than
any other single question accounts for the chronic
polarisation of political differences that followed the
abandonment of Jefferson's method of approach. During this
polarisation the aim of constructing a genuinely
participatory democracy capable of facilitating radical
economic transformation was supplanted by utopian,
speculative claims regarding socialist economic
performance. Consequently the power of inherited wealth was
granted, gratis, the biggest tent of all: equal status with
wealth gained through enterprise and labour. Radical
influence became restricted to the limits of an equally
non-scientific but much smaller tent, from which inherited
wealth and enterprise alike were sanctimoniously excluded
in favour of labour as the sole worthy tenant. The chief
requirement of progress through reason - a clearly
understood line of demarcation from mere prejudice - was in
this way erased. Conflict resolution between radicalism and
conservatism can therefore begin with canvassing for
positive affirmation of the self evident truth that
inheritance tax is the most socially just form of taxation.
It is possible that this truth can be proven by virtue of
the fact that once explained, the majority of randomly
selected respondents will agree to recognise it. One
proviso may be necessary to qualify this contention. Locke
recognised that an impediment to government by consent is
that even when the path of progress can be revealed by the
light of reason, some people may still 'simply prefer
darkness.' This insight has relevance to the question of
inheritance tax. Most CDRSB survey respondents will
comprise individuals willing to deal with political
questions in a consistent manner by virtue of the fact that
they have recognised the importance of defending the right
to a secret ballot and have volunteered to participate in
research directed towards this end. The question of
inheritance tax nevertheless may reveal attitudes which are
based on plain prejudice, not reason. Therefore a proviso
can be included in the research analysis that an admitted
inability to oppose the principle that such a tax is the
most socially just upon a rational foundation can also be
taken account of as supporting proof that this self evident
truth is integral to common sense understanding.
These research tasks can be undertaken primarily in the USA
in those states where the right to bear arms is properly
valued by the general population. For historical reasons
shown here common sense understanding is highly developed
in these states but at the same time, due in large part to
the errors of radicalism, conservatism usually has broad
support. Proof of the existence of the self evident truth
that inheritance tax is the most socially just form of
taxation gained by this method may, coupled with reciprocal
undertakings on the part of global radicalism, sufficiently
convince conservative advocates in the US congress to take
an active interest in supporting this conflict resolution
initiative in regard to its implications for constitutional
reform. Canvassing can take place on the basis of automated
schedules of random selection transparent to sponsors in
advance to guarantee the objective status and non partisan
integrity of the project. Volunteers from among survey
respondents can also play a vital role in the next stage of
research and organisation, since these will consequently be
verifiably independent individuals.
If research and organisation is successful in the USA,
canvassing in the primary state of radical change - the
Russian republic - can be undertaken by volunteers, who
join the CDRSB as independent individuals, with full rights
to self defence. In this way a fully independent
organisation alert to the issues raised here can help
initiate a program of constitutional reform in parallel to
its American cousin with the aim of developing properly
funded non-partisan forms of political participation upon a
foundation of securely established fundamental democratic
rights, including those to jury trial and self defence.
Such American Russian collaboration may serve as a model
for global democratic reform to facilitate the testing,
coexistence and peaceful evolution of different
macroeconomic systems within long term cycles of
constitutional review. The adversarial nature of
representative democratic systems can be preserved in this
process: indeed, advocacy of competing socioeconomic
perspectives can be better clarified as to their
comparative merits.
The point of departure outlined above can help to promote
these principles among parties of the right. Assuming a
conjoint Russian American reform process can be set in
motion, these principles can be promoted more widely on the
Left. As shown present Left experiments with citizen juries
and conflict resolution are untrustworthy. First steps in
these circumstances must include promotion of trial by
jury, most especially in Europe. If successful, the right
to bear arms could also be established on a democratic
foundation. At present this right is granted in a secretive
manner by one or two ministers in each European state. The
role of sortition could be developed in this regard by
establishing a right of appeal to jury review of such
autocratic decisions. Success in America, Russia and Europe
in these tasks can involve the full development of
sortition and random selection in recruitment practices as
a means to increase levels of political participation and
contain the influences of faction across the full range of
applications suggested here in regard to political,
industrial, and state institutions. This is the background
against which the true value of sortition will be realised
- not as a means of gaining short term party advantage, but
as a result of a long term process of constitutional reform
presupposed by the development of an international
consensus based on an enlightened understanding of the
relation between politics and common sense.
The Hansard Society view that sortition is not suited to
effective democratic decision making is based on an
inaccurate understanding of the relative merits of
aristocracy and democracy, and a failure to grasp the flaws
of representation by electoral majority alone, most
especially in regard to the influence of faction.
Recklessly, they effectively endorsed using postal ballots
on demand to address the chronic and increasingly serious
problem of falling voter turnout. The public have not, and
they are correct. Thomas Reid was right: true understanding
must rely first on common sense, and only thereafter on
scholarly expertise. Random selection, as Montesquieu
showed, is the essence of democracy. Its role should be
further developed to help contain the influence of faction
and strengthen political participation. Through such
measures, which may involve a protracted process of trial
and error, democracy can ultimately facilitate conflict
management between radicalism and conservatism. In this way
greater use of sortition will ensure the art of politics is
better developed, both because it will be more widely
mastered and also because being dishonest with the people
will be more difficult.
Jefferson's aspirations in regard to the relation between
modern republicanism, Athenian democracy and common sense
were not utopian, but necessary and practical. Twenty first
century republicanism is lacking some of the most powerful
instruments of Athenian democratic practice, including the
principle of retrospective accountability, as, for example,
could be applied to questions of war, and the use of postal
ballots on demand. Today monosystemic macroeconomic beliefs
still predominate across the political spectrum. Leftists
remain convinced, though more secretively, that world
socialism must triumph. The right believe capitalism must
triumph, forever, and democracy cannot exist without it.
The wiser, Jeffersonian course is to develop genuinely
participatory political systems which can facilitate real
choice between these options - that is to say, freedom -
without conflict.