i) Demarchy: a system of random selection, also known as lottery democracy, lot selection, allocation, etc., in which representatives or public/political officials are chosen at random from a large pool of candidates by means of a lottery, rather than through traditional elections.
ii) Epistocracy (rule by the “most knowledgeable”): a system proposed in political theory in which political power is distributed according to knowledge or political competence. It can take several forms: 1) Political knowledge tests for voting. 2) Weighted voting: everyone votes, but the votes of those who demonstrate greater knowledge carry more weight. 3) Electoral filtering: only those who exceed a certain level of knowledge can vote. The justification is that: 1) many political decisions are complex; 2) a large part of the electorate is poorly informed; 3) more informed decisions could lead to better public policies. Common criticisms: 1) it can become elitist or undemocratic; 2) it is difficult to define what knowledge counts; 3) risk of social or class bias.
iii) System where decisions are taken by the 33% contribution of experts/technicians/technocrats, 33% elected polititians, and 33% citizenship via direct democracy.
Yes, these systems have also many problems that might be worse than current status, and I don't have a strong opinion in this matter, but I am simply raising the concern that we need licenses, permits, authorizations, formation courses and degrees for everything, that is, we must be educated for everything (including for frying a few burguers), but for voting and having childs (and maybe owning guns in your country?) which are really critical to lives of others, the meanest uneducated moron can do it without a problem.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario