The Logic of Randomness: Can Lottery Democracy Truly Replace Electoral Democracy?

Abstract Lottocratic theorists present the logic of randomness as inherently positive and beneficial, forming the conceptual foundation of lottocratic democracy. This paper challenges this narrow interpretation by offering an alternative perspective on the logic of randomness. Using a process-oriented approach, it examines the practical workings of the random selection process to provide a more nuanced understanding. It highlights the inherent problems of randomness in undermining empowerment, weakening consent theory, compromising substantive equality, eroding competence, and bypassing the authorization question. Based on this new understanding of the logic of randomness, this paper critically evaluates the concept of lottery democracy as a purported remedy for the crisis in Western democracies and scrutinizes its political proposals and programs. The claim that lottery democracy can rejuvenate and deepen democratic engagement is explored and found to lack strong empirical support. The critique presented here is grounded in the history of mixed systems in both ancient Athens and contemporary China, especially drawing from deliberative polling exercises conducted in China, providing a real-world context to the discussion.