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.

Previous: Implementation
Back to Postal Ballots on Demand: The Democratic Alternative Index