What do you think?
Rate this book
Rebooting Democracy: A Citizen’s Guide to Reinventing Politics
“If you want things organized, you might have to read some quite tricky books about democracy [such as this one].”
– RUSSELL BRAND, actor and comedian, reading excerpts of Rebooting Democracy on his show The Trews
Unless you are a banker, by now you must have realized that politicians don’t serve your interests. Our democracies are failing us and, from Occupy Wall Street to the riots in São Paulo, millions have taken to the streets to voice their frustration. But is there anything we can do about it?
Rebooting Democracy: A Citizen's Guide to Reinventing Politics takes readers on a global journey in search of solutions. From Vancouver to Saint Petersburg, from France to Australia, we discover that there are sensible ways to reform our democracies. As we travel the globe and zoom in on these real-world democratic breakthroughs, we also pick up insights from the social sciences—from key ideas in political science, sociology and economics to the latest research in social and cognitive psychology—that clarify why elected politicians will always fail to represent us.
In a concise and engaging way, this book shows why the problems we are facing arise from inescapable, structural aspects of our political systems—and invites readers to explore five concrete, innovative ideas to help repair them.
Praise for Rebooting Democracy:
“A quick and easy read that makes the case for why existing political systems are inadequate and then shows examples of how to move us past those problems and toward more democratic systems. Along with many clever insights, Rebooting Democracy: A Citizen’s Guide to Reinventing Politics points the way to where democracy is heading.”
– PROFESSOR JOHN GASTIL, Director of the McCourtney Institute for Democracy at Penn State University
“A bold challenge to the status quo that shows, with some very good examples, how democracy can work. A concise and readable book that makes a cogent case for reinventing politics. Well worth a read.”
– KATHARINE QUARMBY, award-winning journalist; former Britain correspondent for The Economist and political producer for BBC Newsnight
“Passionately argued, yet plainly written, Rebooting Democracy is part scholarship, part manifesto—a wholehearted call for civic engagement at a time of growing dissatisfaction with politics. Manuel Arriaga’s book challenges the idea that our democracies cannot be improved and successfully builds a case for political renewal.”
– ALBERTO ALEMANNO, Professor at HEC Paris and NYU School of Law; Founder of eLabEurope
“A short and engaging book. Written in the irreverent, outsider spirit of the Occupy protests, Rebooting Democracy: A Citizen’s Guide to Reinventing Politics goes well beyond critiquing the status quo. It discusses several ways to democratize our society. [...] Interesting and well-worth reading.”
– YORAM GAT, founder and editor of Equality by Lot
“Don’t you feel sometimes that there is something wrong with contemporary democracy? That politicians are like a separate caste which makes decisions over the heads of people? Why is this happening? In Rebooting Democracy: A Citizen’s Guide to Reinventing Politics, Manuel Arriaga answers these questions in a straightforward manner, carefully explaining point-by-point how it is possible that those we elect so often fail to represent us. But this is only the beginning of the book. [...] [The rest is devoted to] an overview of concrete solutions from different parts of the world. From the citizen panels in British Columbia to ranked voting in Ireland and all the way to campaign finance reform in France.
– RUSSELL BRAND, actor and comedian, reading excerpts of Rebooting Democracy on his show The Trews
Unless you are a banker, by now you must have realized that politicians don’t serve your interests. Our democracies are failing us and, from Occupy Wall Street to the riots in São Paulo, millions have taken to the streets to voice their frustration. But is there anything we can do about it?
Rebooting Democracy: A Citizen's Guide to Reinventing Politics takes readers on a global journey in search of solutions. From Vancouver to Saint Petersburg, from France to Australia, we discover that there are sensible ways to reform our democracies. As we travel the globe and zoom in on these real-world democratic breakthroughs, we also pick up insights from the social sciences—from key ideas in political science, sociology and economics to the latest research in social and cognitive psychology—that clarify why elected politicians will always fail to represent us.
In a concise and engaging way, this book shows why the problems we are facing arise from inescapable, structural aspects of our political systems—and invites readers to explore five concrete, innovative ideas to help repair them.
Praise for Rebooting Democracy:
“A quick and easy read that makes the case for why existing political systems are inadequate and then shows examples of how to move us past those problems and toward more democratic systems. Along with many clever insights, Rebooting Democracy: A Citizen’s Guide to Reinventing Politics points the way to where democracy is heading.”
– PROFESSOR JOHN GASTIL, Director of the McCourtney Institute for Democracy at Penn State University
“A bold challenge to the status quo that shows, with some very good examples, how democracy can work. A concise and readable book that makes a cogent case for reinventing politics. Well worth a read.”
– KATHARINE QUARMBY, award-winning journalist; former Britain correspondent for The Economist and political producer for BBC Newsnight
“Passionately argued, yet plainly written, Rebooting Democracy is part scholarship, part manifesto—a wholehearted call for civic engagement at a time of growing dissatisfaction with politics. Manuel Arriaga’s book challenges the idea that our democracies cannot be improved and successfully builds a case for political renewal.”
– ALBERTO ALEMANNO, Professor at HEC Paris and NYU School of Law; Founder of eLabEurope
“A short and engaging book. Written in the irreverent, outsider spirit of the Occupy protests, Rebooting Democracy: A Citizen’s Guide to Reinventing Politics goes well beyond critiquing the status quo. It discusses several ways to democratize our society. [...] Interesting and well-worth reading.”
– YORAM GAT, founder and editor of Equality by Lot
“Don’t you feel sometimes that there is something wrong with contemporary democracy? That politicians are like a separate caste which makes decisions over the heads of people? Why is this happening? In Rebooting Democracy: A Citizen’s Guide to Reinventing Politics, Manuel Arriaga answers these questions in a straightforward manner, carefully explaining point-by-point how it is possible that those we elect so often fail to represent us. But this is only the beginning of the book. [...] [The rest is devoted to] an overview of concrete solutions from different parts of the world. From the citizen panels in British Columbia to ranked voting in Ireland and all the way to campaign finance reform in France.
- GenresNonfictionPolitics
131 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2014
18 people are currently reading
160 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
July 31, 2016
This featherweight tome offers a lot of bang for the buck. In an opening gambit, the author offers a dry-eyed account of why representational democracy as currently practiced will not, for the most part, take care of the public interest. A mix of hard to avoid psychological and social mechanisms (politicians’ elite group norms, ideological biases, fear of uncertainty, voters’ ‘rational ignorance’, amongst others) and patent design flaws (short electoral cycles, wrong incentives, lack of demographic representativity, lack of supervision, ill-guided political integration) continue to uphold a dysfunctional political system. Much of this is common sense. However, having just read Ianis Varoufakis’ And the Weak Suffer What They Must? - a shocking account of Europe’s monetary crisis - I am reminded how easy it is to lose sight of the tremendous cost of these malpractices.
Arriaga’s proposals for a reboot of democracy are as level-headed as his diagnosis. He sees various forms of ‘citizen deliberation’ as a key route to democratic empowerment in a post-ideological world. This refers to a collection of deliberative formats in which panels with ordinary citizens, supported by policy and scientific experts, develop positions and recommendations on issues of general interest. In one US-based case discussed in the book, citizen panels are used to add a deliberative layer to the process of handling ballot measures:
Arriaga points out that if this process is set up in the right way, then randomly selected citizens are perfectly capable of analyzing and deciding on complex policy matters. I can confirm this based on my own professional experience with citizen panels on complicated health care matters. (Unfortunately the deliberative processes I have been involved in were held in purely consultative settings, without real political leverage).
The principles and practices of citizen deliberation can be expanded beyond topical policy issues. Arriaga suggests to create ‘citizen chambers’ to more structurally oversee political decision-making. And, as in our short-winded political systems investing in more distant temporal perspective is hardly rewarded, citizen panels could be tasked with developing an updating a long-term vision for the community (region, country) as a whole.
Finally, the author points out that these deliberative processes need to be backed up with strategic electoral reform (for instance, the implementation of rank voting instead of voting for a single candidate, and a return to a more democratically acceptable way of party and campaign financing).
I believe that these sober and modest proposals could make a genuinely positive difference in the way our democratic institutions work. It’s not a silver bullet and it’s not meant to be. Insights from a variety of disciplines have confirmed time and again that only our ability to learn faster than our environment changes will help us to survive complexity. Our political systems’ core business today is not learning but desperately maintaining the status quo. Something’s got to give.
Arriaga’s proposals for a reboot of democracy are as level-headed as his diagnosis. He sees various forms of ‘citizen deliberation’ as a key route to democratic empowerment in a post-ideological world. This refers to a collection of deliberative formats in which panels with ordinary citizens, supported by policy and scientific experts, develop positions and recommendations on issues of general interest. In one US-based case discussed in the book, citizen panels are used to add a deliberative layer to the process of handling ballot measures:
Before a referendum is held, a panel of 24 randomly chosen citizens now deliberate for a number of days on the measure being proposed. After interviewing advocates on both sides and consulting scientific experts who provide them with in-depth information on the topic, these citizens carefully analyze the question before them and conclude their work by issuing a public statement. Written in everyday language and not more than two or three pages long, this document includes the panel’s key findings about the choice facing the electorate, short group statements by the panelists who support and oppose the ballot measure; and any additional considerations that the panel collectively deem relevant. (…) The full statement is then included in the ‘voter’s pamphlet’ that all registered voters in Oregon receive in the mail before a referendum.
Arriaga points out that if this process is set up in the right way, then randomly selected citizens are perfectly capable of analyzing and deciding on complex policy matters. I can confirm this based on my own professional experience with citizen panels on complicated health care matters. (Unfortunately the deliberative processes I have been involved in were held in purely consultative settings, without real political leverage).
The principles and practices of citizen deliberation can be expanded beyond topical policy issues. Arriaga suggests to create ‘citizen chambers’ to more structurally oversee political decision-making. And, as in our short-winded political systems investing in more distant temporal perspective is hardly rewarded, citizen panels could be tasked with developing an updating a long-term vision for the community (region, country) as a whole.
Finally, the author points out that these deliberative processes need to be backed up with strategic electoral reform (for instance, the implementation of rank voting instead of voting for a single candidate, and a return to a more democratically acceptable way of party and campaign financing).
I believe that these sober and modest proposals could make a genuinely positive difference in the way our democratic institutions work. It’s not a silver bullet and it’s not meant to be. Insights from a variety of disciplines have confirmed time and again that only our ability to learn faster than our environment changes will help us to survive complexity. Our political systems’ core business today is not learning but desperately maintaining the status quo. Something’s got to give.
March 22, 2025
You know what? Kudos to this book for actually saying something with its full chest. I frequently come across political books that read like, "everything sucks and here's why," but this goes a step further with tangible and direct suggestions for what to do about it; it really is a guide of sorts.
Of course there's the standard solutions like ranked-choice voting and campaign finance reform, but this also discussed a concept of "citizen deliberation" (think of a souped-up round of jury duty except the results get pushed to a public election as a referendum question) that I'd never even heard of before. It even laid out real-world examples of how these have operated in the (then) recent past. There's also discussions on how to tweak recall election rules to better hold politicians accountable in between elections, and just an overall grab bag of specific things that foreign countries do.
The book reads as a little dated now because it was published in 2014 when the Greek austerity programs and the Eurozone crisis was the big news of the day. I did find it curious that even in a pre-Brexit/pre-Trump society the general attitude was described as "literally everyone from the far left to the far right hates establishment politicians". I guess the more things change the more they stay the same. But this is still definitely a book worth checking out if you come across it though.
Of course there's the standard solutions like ranked-choice voting and campaign finance reform, but this also discussed a concept of "citizen deliberation" (think of a souped-up round of jury duty except the results get pushed to a public election as a referendum question) that I'd never even heard of before. It even laid out real-world examples of how these have operated in the (then) recent past. There's also discussions on how to tweak recall election rules to better hold politicians accountable in between elections, and just an overall grab bag of specific things that foreign countries do.
The book reads as a little dated now because it was published in 2014 when the Greek austerity programs and the Eurozone crisis was the big news of the day. I did find it curious that even in a pre-Brexit/pre-Trump society the general attitude was described as "literally everyone from the far left to the far right hates establishment politicians". I guess the more things change the more they stay the same. But this is still definitely a book worth checking out if you come across it though.
September 24, 2014
“[A] long habit of not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of being RIGHT.” Thomas Paine, Common Sense
Rebooting Democracy is an exceptional pamphlet that aspires to be the “Common Sense” of citizen deliberation. I do not say “participatory democracy” because that term is often misunderstood as a plea for higher election turnouts or better-informed voters. Rather, the reforms in “Rebooting” envision the participation of amateur citizens (not career politicians) in governance and decision making—the important stuff that happens between elections. This includes evaluating referenda/initiatives, authorizing candidates for office, and the drafting, debating, or validation of legislation.
Arriaga echoes a call many have been making over the last two decades, e.g., Atlee, Burnheim, Dowlen, Dryzek, Elstub, Fishkin & Ackerman, Gastil, Landemore, Leib, McCormick and others. But he speaks not to academics or sophisticated activists but to those on the streets of New York, Cairo, Athens, Madrid, London, Lisbon, or nearby. The book explains why representative government does not do what it purports to do—represent the interests, knowledge, values of constituents. He then suggests how participatory government could.
“Our politicians…simply do not represent us.” Manuel Arriaga, Rebooting Democracy
Arriaga’s pamphlet, like Paine’s, addresses would-be revolutionaries and a public feeling abused by politicians. It is also like Common Sense in calling on them to reconsider a preconceived notion—elections are democracy—ingrained by time, tradition or miseducation. This is where it succeeds best and is most original. The chapter “Ten reasons politicians fail to represent” enumerate the ways in which elections themselves are the problem, for example the in-group psychological identification of politicians with donors and lobbyists, no matter how right-minded and idealistic they may have come to office. That chapter by itself makes it a valuable book.
Rebooting Democracy argues that elections themselves have undemocratic effects! Whether it succeeds at making that idea more accessible, or galvanizing would-be revolutionaries, only time will tell. But Arriaga’s call to “reboot,” makes an original contribution to the “neo-Athenian” renewed interest in participatory democracy on the streets and in some political science circles. The movement evinces a “Second French Revolution” not based on enumerated human rights (such as freedom of expression) but on something truly progressive: the right to participate in the process of governing.
To that end, Arriaga suggests five ideas reflecting recent reforms and experiments in Ireland, British Columbia, Australia, Oregon. One idea would mimic and expand Oregon’s Citizen Initiative Review jury process into a “citizens’ chamber” that can review and block (with a sufficient majority) any bill being contemplated by elected legislatures. Here the book is less specific, because it does not aim to give a blueprint for government but rather suggests types of reforms that could improve it.
Other measures suggested are not at all revolutionary. For example, Arriaga advocates “rank voting” or IRV to make elections more closely match citizens’ actual preferences. Another is to tighten campaign finance laws. For some, he does not go far enough to correct the ills of elections; for others, he goes just far enough for the time being. But what he undeniably does is put elections under the microscope and open the conversation about citizen-led politics.
If Tom Paine said, “How ridiculous, that a tiny island should govern an entire continent,” then Manuel Arriaga is saying, “How ridiculous, that the vast majority should delegate their power to a small clique every four years then sit idly by another four!”
Rebooting Democracy is an exceptional pamphlet that aspires to be the “Common Sense” of citizen deliberation. I do not say “participatory democracy” because that term is often misunderstood as a plea for higher election turnouts or better-informed voters. Rather, the reforms in “Rebooting” envision the participation of amateur citizens (not career politicians) in governance and decision making—the important stuff that happens between elections. This includes evaluating referenda/initiatives, authorizing candidates for office, and the drafting, debating, or validation of legislation.
Arriaga echoes a call many have been making over the last two decades, e.g., Atlee, Burnheim, Dowlen, Dryzek, Elstub, Fishkin & Ackerman, Gastil, Landemore, Leib, McCormick and others. But he speaks not to academics or sophisticated activists but to those on the streets of New York, Cairo, Athens, Madrid, London, Lisbon, or nearby. The book explains why representative government does not do what it purports to do—represent the interests, knowledge, values of constituents. He then suggests how participatory government could.
“Our politicians…simply do not represent us.” Manuel Arriaga, Rebooting Democracy
Arriaga’s pamphlet, like Paine’s, addresses would-be revolutionaries and a public feeling abused by politicians. It is also like Common Sense in calling on them to reconsider a preconceived notion—elections are democracy—ingrained by time, tradition or miseducation. This is where it succeeds best and is most original. The chapter “Ten reasons politicians fail to represent” enumerate the ways in which elections themselves are the problem, for example the in-group psychological identification of politicians with donors and lobbyists, no matter how right-minded and idealistic they may have come to office. That chapter by itself makes it a valuable book.
Rebooting Democracy argues that elections themselves have undemocratic effects! Whether it succeeds at making that idea more accessible, or galvanizing would-be revolutionaries, only time will tell. But Arriaga’s call to “reboot,” makes an original contribution to the “neo-Athenian” renewed interest in participatory democracy on the streets and in some political science circles. The movement evinces a “Second French Revolution” not based on enumerated human rights (such as freedom of expression) but on something truly progressive: the right to participate in the process of governing.
To that end, Arriaga suggests five ideas reflecting recent reforms and experiments in Ireland, British Columbia, Australia, Oregon. One idea would mimic and expand Oregon’s Citizen Initiative Review jury process into a “citizens’ chamber” that can review and block (with a sufficient majority) any bill being contemplated by elected legislatures. Here the book is less specific, because it does not aim to give a blueprint for government but rather suggests types of reforms that could improve it.
Other measures suggested are not at all revolutionary. For example, Arriaga advocates “rank voting” or IRV to make elections more closely match citizens’ actual preferences. Another is to tighten campaign finance laws. For some, he does not go far enough to correct the ills of elections; for others, he goes just far enough for the time being. But what he undeniably does is put elections under the microscope and open the conversation about citizen-led politics.
If Tom Paine said, “How ridiculous, that a tiny island should govern an entire continent,” then Manuel Arriaga is saying, “How ridiculous, that the vast majority should delegate their power to a small clique every four years then sit idly by another four!”
May 21, 2021
O livro pode ser lido online, gratuitamente e em inglês, aqui. Livro de 2015. Sugiro que leiam, ou comprem em Português. Abaixo estão essencialmente as notas que tirei, formando, em geral, um resumo das ideias, mas acabei por desenvolver ou alertar para uma ou outra que achei que poderia estar incluída. Ao final do dia é um livro que se lê magnificamente bem, com uma linguagem que até a criança da primária entende.
“Um cidadão autónomo não é independente dos outros, mas significa que tem controlo sobre as suas atividades e que aprova os valores que lhes estão implícitos. É «razoavelmente livre» e tem algo a dizer como as coisas são feitas [Parafraseado]”
Será que os políticos nos representam? A não ser que seja um bancário, considero que não seja muito difícil encontrar cidadãos que respondam negativamente a esta questão, e os movimentos que surgem hoje contra o estabelecimento ou contra as elites mostram precisamente isto. O livro assume que o leitor reconhece este facto, e também está interessado em se informar mais para melhores escolhas no momento de exercer o voto, ou quando tem de tomar alguma posição sobre esta ou aquela política.
As nossas democracias não estão a funcionar e precisamos de recuperar o controlo sobre o nosso futuro. Se os políticos no nosso país já mal nos representam, e se preocupam mais com os seus semelhantes e elite empresárias, quanto menos aqueles que estão em Bruxelas. Ainda que tecnicamente sejamos considerados cidadãos europeus, na prática, por razões culturais e políticas, estaríamos a mentir ao dizer que nos preocupamos tanto com o cidadão na Alemanha da mesma forma que nos preocupamos com os nossos familiares vizinhos – mesmo que tenhamos amigos e familiares por todo o lado, há sempre um lar ou outro que afeta mais o nosso modo de viver.
Os políticos que mandam na Europa identificam-se mais com a elite partidária de onde vêm e com as elites empresariais que lhes fazem lobby, do que os seus concidadãos da classe média trabalhadora. Por consequência, e como ficou claro nos últimos anos, apesar de sermos cidadãos europeus, os políticos sentem o mesmo que nós: têm como prioridade o seu próprio país, ou grupo de países (Norte vs Sul por exemplo). Como podemos descentralizar este poder e ter algum controle sobre o que os políticos fazem?
O verdadeiro objetivo de Manuel Arriaga foi lançar um debate público para reformar os nossos sistemas políticos. Considerando o aparente crescimento do autoritarismo e ressurgimento de velhas ideias, não sei o quanto eficaz foi este livro, e se Arriaga esteja a ver resultados, mas pelo menos confessa-se otimista no final do livro. Os cidadãos vivem – supostamente – numa democracia representativa, mas a classe política deixou de responder perante a população e “nem mesmo as maiores manifestações podem travar uma classe política determinada.” Esta determinação é vivida no nosso país, imaginem quando queremos ser ouvidos em Bruxelas e a própria comunicação social é quem faz juízo de valor sobre a própria vontade do cidadão, e julga até a sanidade do mesmo ou da sua mensagem. O Quarto Estado também não nos representa.
Desde as alterações climáticas, declínio ou estagnação de salários reais, desmantelamento de serviços sociais, imigração, as vozes parecem não serem ouvidas. Conceitos tradicionais de esquerda ou direita não estão por detrás das medidas apresentadas no livro, e eu próprio irei evitar chutar para um lado ou outro.
Primeiro são apresentadas 10 razões pelas quais os políticos não nos representam, nem nos representarão. O que parece que todas elas têm em comum, apesar de originarem de várias áreas do saber, é que apontam para problemas estruturais, ou seja, no sistema político, incluindo o eleitoral. Mudar os atores de uma peça que é má não serve de muito. O que estará sempre em questão é o “interesse público”, que na ciência política pode ter vários significados, mas para o efeito deste livro, será um termo usado e assume-se que nem sempre corresponde os desejos expressos pela maioria da população, incluindo a que viram naquela última sondagem na semana passada.
O autor procura de alguma forma um mundo “pós-ideológico”, onde decisões serão tomadas por pragmatismo fundamentado e democraticamente, ultrapassando conceitos pré-concebidos de esquerda ou direita. [acho que por defeito, caímos sempre para um lado ou para o outro, mesmo pelo bem comum, mas não vou entrar nisso aqui].
Contesta ainda a ideia que a globalização das coisas e das comunidades, tornam impossível implementar reformas ambiciosas contrárias aos interesses das elites políticas e económicas que já nos governam. O melhor argumento contra as ideias apresentadas no livro, estará na incerteza como tais alterações numa parte do sistema vão afetar o funcionamento de todo o sistema. Felizmente há projetos piloto e casos reais pelos quais podemos tirar algumas conclusões, e certamente o passo seguinte será tirar proveito da descentralização da informação e criar literacia política e financeira, permitindo dar mais confiança ao cidadão, e aumentar a nossa confiança nos concidadãos.
Democratizar e dar mais poder ao cidadão aumentará a sua noção da realidade, mas também lhe traz mais responsabilidades, neste caso de cidadania e políticas. Em muitas culturas, e se calhar até instintivamente, chuta-se para canto, deixando para os que achamos mais sábios que nós ou com mais tempo que nós. O que este livro vem desmistificar é que independentemente dos canudos e das gordas contas bancárias que os políticos têm, os cidadãos são capazes de tomar decisões difíceis e informadas, especialmente quando tem consequências nas suas próprias vidas. Porém isto também supõe que os cidadãos estão dispostos a ouvir os especialistas, de várias áreas e pontos de vista, e desenvolverem um pensamento crítico dos problemas que querem resolver. Haverá sempre os extremos e os céticos, mas matematicamente continua a valer a pena.
Algo que Manuel Arriaga fez muito bem foi mostrar os prós e contras das suas próprias ideias, e isto é honestidade intelectual. Acho que este livro é importante para quem se preocupa em descentralizar poder, e realmente se preocupa em retirar o engrandecimento das elites, procurando alternativas mais ao nível de raiz para enfrentar os problemas da sociedade.
Totalidade da Análise pode ser lida no blog
“Um cidadão autónomo não é independente dos outros, mas significa que tem controlo sobre as suas atividades e que aprova os valores que lhes estão implícitos. É «razoavelmente livre» e tem algo a dizer como as coisas são feitas [Parafraseado]”
Será que os políticos nos representam? A não ser que seja um bancário, considero que não seja muito difícil encontrar cidadãos que respondam negativamente a esta questão, e os movimentos que surgem hoje contra o estabelecimento ou contra as elites mostram precisamente isto. O livro assume que o leitor reconhece este facto, e também está interessado em se informar mais para melhores escolhas no momento de exercer o voto, ou quando tem de tomar alguma posição sobre esta ou aquela política.
As nossas democracias não estão a funcionar e precisamos de recuperar o controlo sobre o nosso futuro. Se os políticos no nosso país já mal nos representam, e se preocupam mais com os seus semelhantes e elite empresárias, quanto menos aqueles que estão em Bruxelas. Ainda que tecnicamente sejamos considerados cidadãos europeus, na prática, por razões culturais e políticas, estaríamos a mentir ao dizer que nos preocupamos tanto com o cidadão na Alemanha da mesma forma que nos preocupamos com os nossos familiares vizinhos – mesmo que tenhamos amigos e familiares por todo o lado, há sempre um lar ou outro que afeta mais o nosso modo de viver.
Os políticos que mandam na Europa identificam-se mais com a elite partidária de onde vêm e com as elites empresariais que lhes fazem lobby, do que os seus concidadãos da classe média trabalhadora. Por consequência, e como ficou claro nos últimos anos, apesar de sermos cidadãos europeus, os políticos sentem o mesmo que nós: têm como prioridade o seu próprio país, ou grupo de países (Norte vs Sul por exemplo). Como podemos descentralizar este poder e ter algum controle sobre o que os políticos fazem?
O verdadeiro objetivo de Manuel Arriaga foi lançar um debate público para reformar os nossos sistemas políticos. Considerando o aparente crescimento do autoritarismo e ressurgimento de velhas ideias, não sei o quanto eficaz foi este livro, e se Arriaga esteja a ver resultados, mas pelo menos confessa-se otimista no final do livro. Os cidadãos vivem – supostamente – numa democracia representativa, mas a classe política deixou de responder perante a população e “nem mesmo as maiores manifestações podem travar uma classe política determinada.” Esta determinação é vivida no nosso país, imaginem quando queremos ser ouvidos em Bruxelas e a própria comunicação social é quem faz juízo de valor sobre a própria vontade do cidadão, e julga até a sanidade do mesmo ou da sua mensagem. O Quarto Estado também não nos representa.
Desde as alterações climáticas, declínio ou estagnação de salários reais, desmantelamento de serviços sociais, imigração, as vozes parecem não serem ouvidas. Conceitos tradicionais de esquerda ou direita não estão por detrás das medidas apresentadas no livro, e eu próprio irei evitar chutar para um lado ou outro.
Primeiro são apresentadas 10 razões pelas quais os políticos não nos representam, nem nos representarão. O que parece que todas elas têm em comum, apesar de originarem de várias áreas do saber, é que apontam para problemas estruturais, ou seja, no sistema político, incluindo o eleitoral. Mudar os atores de uma peça que é má não serve de muito. O que estará sempre em questão é o “interesse público”, que na ciência política pode ter vários significados, mas para o efeito deste livro, será um termo usado e assume-se que nem sempre corresponde os desejos expressos pela maioria da população, incluindo a que viram naquela última sondagem na semana passada.
O autor procura de alguma forma um mundo “pós-ideológico”, onde decisões serão tomadas por pragmatismo fundamentado e democraticamente, ultrapassando conceitos pré-concebidos de esquerda ou direita. [acho que por defeito, caímos sempre para um lado ou para o outro, mesmo pelo bem comum, mas não vou entrar nisso aqui].
Contesta ainda a ideia que a globalização das coisas e das comunidades, tornam impossível implementar reformas ambiciosas contrárias aos interesses das elites políticas e económicas que já nos governam. O melhor argumento contra as ideias apresentadas no livro, estará na incerteza como tais alterações numa parte do sistema vão afetar o funcionamento de todo o sistema. Felizmente há projetos piloto e casos reais pelos quais podemos tirar algumas conclusões, e certamente o passo seguinte será tirar proveito da descentralização da informação e criar literacia política e financeira, permitindo dar mais confiança ao cidadão, e aumentar a nossa confiança nos concidadãos.
Democratizar e dar mais poder ao cidadão aumentará a sua noção da realidade, mas também lhe traz mais responsabilidades, neste caso de cidadania e políticas. Em muitas culturas, e se calhar até instintivamente, chuta-se para canto, deixando para os que achamos mais sábios que nós ou com mais tempo que nós. O que este livro vem desmistificar é que independentemente dos canudos e das gordas contas bancárias que os políticos têm, os cidadãos são capazes de tomar decisões difíceis e informadas, especialmente quando tem consequências nas suas próprias vidas. Porém isto também supõe que os cidadãos estão dispostos a ouvir os especialistas, de várias áreas e pontos de vista, e desenvolverem um pensamento crítico dos problemas que querem resolver. Haverá sempre os extremos e os céticos, mas matematicamente continua a valer a pena.
Algo que Manuel Arriaga fez muito bem foi mostrar os prós e contras das suas próprias ideias, e isto é honestidade intelectual. Acho que este livro é importante para quem se preocupa em descentralizar poder, e realmente se preocupa em retirar o engrandecimento das elites, procurando alternativas mais ao nível de raiz para enfrentar os problemas da sociedade.
Totalidade da Análise pode ser lida no blog
August 3, 2018
A sensible little book from Manuel Arriaga which offers ten reasons why politicians are usually the wrong people for the job, and five ways to create – or at least move towards – genuine democracy.
Democracy means government by the people for the people. It’s what we’re supposed to have in the UK, but in practice it doesn’t work like that. No matter who you vote for, once they get into power they all tend to act in the interests of big business, and disregard the needs and rights of the ordinary people who voted for them. Politicians are the wrong people, doing the wrong things for the wrong reasons. No wonder we’re in a mess.
My abridged version of Arriaga’s ten things wrong with politicians:
Politicians are corrupt (legal and illegal donations, revolving door appointments)
Politicians are motivated by reelection (leading to populism, short termism, image more important than substance)
Politicians are egotistical (motivated by a desire for power)
Politicians are smug (once in power they think they are immune to public control)
Politicians are weak (even if they’re not corrupt the system will corrupt them)
Politicians are politicians (they succumb to political norms)
Politicians are elitist (or if they’re not, they get sucked into this too)
Politicians believe their own bullshit (living in a bubble they seldom challenge their pet ideologies)
Politicians aren’t normal people (demographically they’re not representative)
Politicians are powerless (the system is all encompassing, often their hands are tied)
simpsons24a
Not only are politicians terrible at their job, the public – their employers – barely supervise them. We vote once every four or five years, and in between have practically no control over what they do.
But the worst thing is that even if we did have more control most people would have no idea what they want politicians to do anyway. Politics is so vast and complex that it’s practically impossible for any ordinary person to understand what’s going on.
"Together, these problems present a real challenge. On the one hand, we can entrust power to a political elite who is able to minimally ponder policy issues – but who is also almost totally unaccountable to the general population. (This is what we have been doing so far.)
On the other, we can give voters a stronger voice through, for example, a more direct form of democracy, but the risk is that they will speak in an uninformed, non-thinking way. Neither seems an especially promising approach."
The first, and the core of Arriaga’s solutions is Citizen Deliberation:
"A group of ordinary citizens is tasked with collectively deciding on a policy matter. They consult with experts, listen to advocates representing different interest groups and, with the assistance of skilled facilitators, engage in careful, reasoned group discussions in which they explore the issues at hand. Throughout the entire process, the citizen panel is autonomous and its actions self-directed: it decides on, for example, the information it needs to gather from external sources, which experts or advocates to interview and what questions to ask them."
These citizens will be chosen randomly in the same way that citizens are called up for jury service. They will be given time off work and paid a reasonable fee for their work.
Asking ordinary people to govern isn’t a new idea. It was first used in ancient Athens where politicians were chosen by lot, to avoid the inevitable corruption of professional politicians, which apparently happened in those days as much as it does now.
More recently, a citizen’s assembly was formed in British Columbia in 2004 to come up with a proposal for reforming the electoral system. One hundred and sixty people met over 11 weekends and learned from experts about different options. Eventually they decided on the Single Transferable Vote, a form of proportional representation which politicians dislike, but which puts power in the hands of voters.
In 2010 in Oregon a Citizens’ Initiative Review process was established in which 24 random citizens carefully research referendum issues and compile their findings into a pamphlet which is sent to all voters before the referendum is held. After a one year trial this system is now a permanent feature in that state.
The second solution is electoral reform, and Arriaga suggests two measures – the Single Transferable Vote, as described above, and currently in use in Ireland, Malta and Australia, and limits on campaign funding as they have in France.
The third solution looks at how to keep politicians honest, after they’ve been elected. Arriaga favours giving citizens a kind of “bright red STOP button”, if, for example, politicians try to raise tuition fees after being elected on the promise that they would never do so, or invade a foreign country against the wishes of the people. He suggests learning from Switzerland and holding referendums whenever a required number of signatures is gathered, and he adds to this that before the referendum a citizens’ panel should research the matter to provide reliable information for the electorate.
The fourth is freeing our politicians from centralised decision making. International or supranational institutions are far removed from democratic accountability. The EU in particular is detached from the population it is supposed to serve.
And the fifth solution is for governments to embrace different time frames for decision making. Our democratic system is structured in such a way that long term thinking is pushed aside for short term gain, a system that is hopeless for dealing with climate change. Arriaga proposes a “Long Now Citizens’ Assembly” which would meet every ten years and set long term visions for the country.
"Using citizen assemblies to agree on a national vision … presents us with a scenario in which the only overarching ideal is one of reasoned decision making via careful, shared consideration of the most important issue facing us. Political labels fade away, ceding ground to well reasoned and truly democratic pragmatism."
Democracy means government by the people for the people. It’s what we’re supposed to have in the UK, but in practice it doesn’t work like that. No matter who you vote for, once they get into power they all tend to act in the interests of big business, and disregard the needs and rights of the ordinary people who voted for them. Politicians are the wrong people, doing the wrong things for the wrong reasons. No wonder we’re in a mess.
My abridged version of Arriaga’s ten things wrong with politicians:
Politicians are corrupt (legal and illegal donations, revolving door appointments)
Politicians are motivated by reelection (leading to populism, short termism, image more important than substance)
Politicians are egotistical (motivated by a desire for power)
Politicians are smug (once in power they think they are immune to public control)
Politicians are weak (even if they’re not corrupt the system will corrupt them)
Politicians are politicians (they succumb to political norms)
Politicians are elitist (or if they’re not, they get sucked into this too)
Politicians believe their own bullshit (living in a bubble they seldom challenge their pet ideologies)
Politicians aren’t normal people (demographically they’re not representative)
Politicians are powerless (the system is all encompassing, often their hands are tied)
simpsons24a
Not only are politicians terrible at their job, the public – their employers – barely supervise them. We vote once every four or five years, and in between have practically no control over what they do.
But the worst thing is that even if we did have more control most people would have no idea what they want politicians to do anyway. Politics is so vast and complex that it’s practically impossible for any ordinary person to understand what’s going on.
"Together, these problems present a real challenge. On the one hand, we can entrust power to a political elite who is able to minimally ponder policy issues – but who is also almost totally unaccountable to the general population. (This is what we have been doing so far.)
On the other, we can give voters a stronger voice through, for example, a more direct form of democracy, but the risk is that they will speak in an uninformed, non-thinking way. Neither seems an especially promising approach."
The first, and the core of Arriaga’s solutions is Citizen Deliberation:
"A group of ordinary citizens is tasked with collectively deciding on a policy matter. They consult with experts, listen to advocates representing different interest groups and, with the assistance of skilled facilitators, engage in careful, reasoned group discussions in which they explore the issues at hand. Throughout the entire process, the citizen panel is autonomous and its actions self-directed: it decides on, for example, the information it needs to gather from external sources, which experts or advocates to interview and what questions to ask them."
These citizens will be chosen randomly in the same way that citizens are called up for jury service. They will be given time off work and paid a reasonable fee for their work.
Asking ordinary people to govern isn’t a new idea. It was first used in ancient Athens where politicians were chosen by lot, to avoid the inevitable corruption of professional politicians, which apparently happened in those days as much as it does now.
More recently, a citizen’s assembly was formed in British Columbia in 2004 to come up with a proposal for reforming the electoral system. One hundred and sixty people met over 11 weekends and learned from experts about different options. Eventually they decided on the Single Transferable Vote, a form of proportional representation which politicians dislike, but which puts power in the hands of voters.
In 2010 in Oregon a Citizens’ Initiative Review process was established in which 24 random citizens carefully research referendum issues and compile their findings into a pamphlet which is sent to all voters before the referendum is held. After a one year trial this system is now a permanent feature in that state.
The second solution is electoral reform, and Arriaga suggests two measures – the Single Transferable Vote, as described above, and currently in use in Ireland, Malta and Australia, and limits on campaign funding as they have in France.
The third solution looks at how to keep politicians honest, after they’ve been elected. Arriaga favours giving citizens a kind of “bright red STOP button”, if, for example, politicians try to raise tuition fees after being elected on the promise that they would never do so, or invade a foreign country against the wishes of the people. He suggests learning from Switzerland and holding referendums whenever a required number of signatures is gathered, and he adds to this that before the referendum a citizens’ panel should research the matter to provide reliable information for the electorate.
The fourth is freeing our politicians from centralised decision making. International or supranational institutions are far removed from democratic accountability. The EU in particular is detached from the population it is supposed to serve.
And the fifth solution is for governments to embrace different time frames for decision making. Our democratic system is structured in such a way that long term thinking is pushed aside for short term gain, a system that is hopeless for dealing with climate change. Arriaga proposes a “Long Now Citizens’ Assembly” which would meet every ten years and set long term visions for the country.
"Using citizen assemblies to agree on a national vision … presents us with a scenario in which the only overarching ideal is one of reasoned decision making via careful, shared consideration of the most important issue facing us. Political labels fade away, ceding ground to well reasoned and truly democratic pragmatism."
June 27, 2016
Don't necessarily agree with everything but food for thought and some examples there that I'm interested in reading and researching more about. Should be mandatory reading given current political situation in the EU, and also Brexit.
Whether it's a silver bullet though... perhaps not. Sadly us humans sometimes seem incapable to save us from ourselves..
Whether it's a silver bullet though... perhaps not. Sadly us humans sometimes seem incapable to save us from ourselves..
December 10, 2020
"Rebooting democracy" isn't a book with a sure fire solution, it is a compelling summary of some of the biggest failures in our current system as well as showing that there is a way to do politics "better".
It is one of those books that everyone should have to read before being able to vote, not only because it points some solutions, but most of all because it instills in the reader the will to search for better organizational systems/behaviors as well as demystifies a lot of the lies ingrained in the public to protect the current system.
Manuel Arriaga makes use of an easy to understand speech, to point out some of the systemic failures of our democracies, even though some points are just slightly mentioned, it builds a clear case for everyone who doubts the stupidity of the actual organizational system of our system.
Through the book it is offered several options in which it would be possible to re-empower the people by fortifying our society through values and not by dividends (at the same time showing that every option has its flaws disregarding any delusions).
even though changing the vote system, campaigning regulations, or installing citizen's assembly, wouldn't be easy or miraculous it would certainly plant the seeds for more responsible citizenry as well as less corporate governments.
It is one of those books that everyone should have to read before being able to vote, not only because it points some solutions, but most of all because it instills in the reader the will to search for better organizational systems/behaviors as well as demystifies a lot of the lies ingrained in the public to protect the current system.
Manuel Arriaga makes use of an easy to understand speech, to point out some of the systemic failures of our democracies, even though some points are just slightly mentioned, it builds a clear case for everyone who doubts the stupidity of the actual organizational system of our system.
Through the book it is offered several options in which it would be possible to re-empower the people by fortifying our society through values and not by dividends (at the same time showing that every option has its flaws disregarding any delusions).
even though changing the vote system, campaigning regulations, or installing citizen's assembly, wouldn't be easy or miraculous it would certainly plant the seeds for more responsible citizenry as well as less corporate governments.
January 24, 2015
Excellent. Highly recommend that everyone reads this one: it's very short (little more than a pamphlet really) but has some specific, powerful ideas about how we could improve the functioning of our democracy.
The biggest/most radical idea is for the use of 'deliberative citizens panels'. Essentially, a group of people is selected at random (like jury service) and tasked with scrutinising policy proposals. They're paid for their time, and they're given access to all the expert opinion and support that they want. They set their own agenda and in due course they reach a decision backed by a majority (or perhaps a 60% supermajority) and publish their findings. The press are obliged to prominently report these findings, and if there is criticism of them, the panel has a right to reply.
The idea is that such panels could, perhaps, replace the House of Lords, or could perhaps be convened to discuss particular, big, longterm issues (say, energy policy). There could then be a referendum on accepting or rejecting their findings as government policy.
Arriaga tries to keep focused purely on the functioning of democracy, without getting into politics - so I think this is a good read whether you're on the right or the left.
As I say, I urge all my friends to read it. It'll only take you a day or two and it's very cheap on Kindle.
The biggest/most radical idea is for the use of 'deliberative citizens panels'. Essentially, a group of people is selected at random (like jury service) and tasked with scrutinising policy proposals. They're paid for their time, and they're given access to all the expert opinion and support that they want. They set their own agenda and in due course they reach a decision backed by a majority (or perhaps a 60% supermajority) and publish their findings. The press are obliged to prominently report these findings, and if there is criticism of them, the panel has a right to reply.
The idea is that such panels could, perhaps, replace the House of Lords, or could perhaps be convened to discuss particular, big, longterm issues (say, energy policy). There could then be a referendum on accepting or rejecting their findings as government policy.
Arriaga tries to keep focused purely on the functioning of democracy, without getting into politics - so I think this is a good read whether you're on the right or the left.
As I say, I urge all my friends to read it. It'll only take you a day or two and it's very cheap on Kindle.
Read
July 4, 2016According to Winston Churchill; “Democracy is the worst form of government….except all the others”- and the first part of this book pretty much explains why. But the phenomenon that is Donald Trump has made a lot of people think that the world’s greatest liberal democratic system is well past its sell-by date and ironically, its economic nemesis is a barely reformed China. So now is a very good time to think about “re-booting” and what that might look like.
But is it a good read? One of the early adopters of the book was the anarchic Russel Brand, which presumably generated some useful publicity but suggests to a prospective reader that it will be puerile and impractical. This does Arriaga a disservice. He’s a published academic and he manages to make the book personal and passionate enough to keep things lively but avoids polemic nonsense. On the contrary, the second half of the book comprises a series of case studies that suggest how some fairly radical surgery can be applied to democracy in real-world situations. So, whilst this book isn’t for everybody, if you’re scratching your head and wondering how Donald Trump became a serious US presidential candidate, this could be both instructive and enjoyable.
But is it a good read? One of the early adopters of the book was the anarchic Russel Brand, which presumably generated some useful publicity but suggests to a prospective reader that it will be puerile and impractical. This does Arriaga a disservice. He’s a published academic and he manages to make the book personal and passionate enough to keep things lively but avoids polemic nonsense. On the contrary, the second half of the book comprises a series of case studies that suggest how some fairly radical surgery can be applied to democracy in real-world situations. So, whilst this book isn’t for everybody, if you’re scratching your head and wondering how Donald Trump became a serious US presidential candidate, this could be both instructive and enjoyable.
September 16, 2015
Perfectly reflects and crystalises my current frustrations
For me, reading this book was quite a revelation. It both explained and helped to crystalise my current frustrations with the way our countries are run.
The book puts forward a basic outline for a system that to me seems remarkably sensible and fair. What it does not do is suggest how we might pull together to bring about such change.
Do I want to try out the suggestions? Yes!
Do I think I will ever see this kind of reform in my lifetime? No, unfortunately I see too much apathy around me, and I fear that anyone who publicly espouses this kind of reform would be ridiculed and dismissed before they had a chance to fully explain the ideas.
This is a fantastic book that I wish all of my friends and peers would read, in order that we can start the ball rolling on a much wider dialogue.
For me, reading this book was quite a revelation. It both explained and helped to crystalise my current frustrations with the way our countries are run.
The book puts forward a basic outline for a system that to me seems remarkably sensible and fair. What it does not do is suggest how we might pull together to bring about such change.
Do I want to try out the suggestions? Yes!
Do I think I will ever see this kind of reform in my lifetime? No, unfortunately I see too much apathy around me, and I fear that anyone who publicly espouses this kind of reform would be ridiculed and dismissed before they had a chance to fully explain the ideas.
This is a fantastic book that I wish all of my friends and peers would read, in order that we can start the ball rolling on a much wider dialogue.
September 16, 2015
For me, reading this book was quite a revelation. It both explained and helped to crystalise my current frustrations with the way our countries are run.
The book puts forward a basic outline for a system that to me seems remarkably sensible and fair. What it does not do is suggest how we might pull together to bring about such change.
Do I want to try out the suggestions? Yes!
Do I think I will ever see this kind of reform in my lifetime? No, unfortunately I see too much apathy around me, and I fear that anyone who publicly espouses this kind of reform would be ridiculed and dismissed before they had a chance to fully explain the ideas.
This is a fantastic book that I wish all of my friends and peers would read, in order that we can start the ball rolling on a much wider dialogue.
The book puts forward a basic outline for a system that to me seems remarkably sensible and fair. What it does not do is suggest how we might pull together to bring about such change.
Do I want to try out the suggestions? Yes!
Do I think I will ever see this kind of reform in my lifetime? No, unfortunately I see too much apathy around me, and I fear that anyone who publicly espouses this kind of reform would be ridiculed and dismissed before they had a chance to fully explain the ideas.
This is a fantastic book that I wish all of my friends and peers would read, in order that we can start the ball rolling on a much wider dialogue.
June 16, 2016
An interesting book for anyone concerned with the workings of democracy today. The author propounds the theory that the people are a better judge of what we need than the politicians they elect.
The author has clearly done a good bit of research into the machinations and processes of government – particularly into the odd processes that have grown up in the late 20th century – and he makes several suggestions as to how these processes can be reversed. Intersting, but I wasn’t entirely convinced by his arguments.
Well written and thought provoking, nonetheless.
The author has clearly done a good bit of research into the machinations and processes of government – particularly into the odd processes that have grown up in the late 20th century – and he makes several suggestions as to how these processes can be reversed. Intersting, but I wasn’t entirely convinced by his arguments.
Well written and thought provoking, nonetheless.
September 15, 2015
Recomendo vivamente a leitura. Aquele que procura alternativas que visam defender os interesses do cidadão contra o modelo atual da democracia. Irá parar de ler algumas vezes para refletir nas abordagens propostas e como se poderiam adaptar para resolver os problemas do dia-a-dia dos cidadãos. Muito bom. A sequela do "Triunfo dos Porcos" de George Orwell.
May 24, 2016
A quick read outlining theories of why politicians evolve into a self serving class of their own, thereby creating and sustaining a faulty, corrupt system.
This is the followed by alternative systems that assure democracy in its purest sense.
Not rocket science, easy to read, yet could haven been referenced with a little more substance.
Good succinct points, easily read in no time
This is the followed by alternative systems that assure democracy in its purest sense.
Not rocket science, easy to read, yet could haven been referenced with a little more substance.
Good succinct points, easily read in no time
September 25, 2015
Muito interessante para alargar o nosso horizonte sobre a ideia que temos de sistema político; muito bem estruturado na forma como expõe as questões e as aborda por diferentes prismas apontando os problemas e possíveis soluções.
June 29, 2016
This is a thought-provoking analysis of some of the failings of our current system of democracy, with practical suggestions for how it might be improved. Thoroughly researched, and very persuasive.
August 31, 2016
if you have stopped having faith in politicians and thinking there is no alternatives, read this book and think again
September 27, 2015
Some good ideas along with good insight into what does and does not work in our present democracy.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews