Recent decades have seen extensive research into the historical virtues and drawbacks of random selection or lottery and how these might be adopted for address the shortcomings of modern democratic institutions, to the extent that the question of whether the lottery is a democratic institution has given rise to much debate and deliberation. In this article, I will demonstrate that the lottery is not a democratic institution by discussing my view of democracy, summarizing the main advantages of drawing lots, and arguing that there is no democratic element in a lottery. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why violent video games should not be banned"? Get the original essay In his article "The Original Meaning of Democracy", Ober (2008) states that democracy is "the collective capacity to an audience to do good.” things happen in the public sphere.” The word democracy comes from two Greek words, “demos” meaning people and “kratos” meaning power. Democracy can be classified into two types: representative democracy and direct democracy. At its most basic level, representative democracy is a system in which citizens elect government officials to represent their interests. According to Sorensen (1993), representative democracy is a system "of a highly inclusive level of political participation in the selection of leaders and policies, at least through regular and fair elections, such that no major social group is not excluded. » Direct democracy, on the contrary, is characterized by the fact that citizens participate directly in decision-making by voting on issues and proposals instead of being represented by civil servants. The lottery was introduced as a means of selecting candidates for the Council or Ball and Courts. and facilitated descriptive representation, that is, the participation of individuals from traditionally excluded backgrounds (Headlam, 1993). The phenomenon is known as lottery and refers to the selection by lot of citizens for public office (Engelstad, 1989; Stone, 2012). This was to facilitate the prevention of corruption of power and domination (Walzer, 1983) through randomly selected citizens so that the chances of a charismatic tyrant taking power would be very low. To further strengthen the transparency of the institution, the assembly saw its members participate in an “equal rotation” each year (Goodwin 2005). Although drawing lots can be seen as having many plausible advantages, it is important to understand its disadvantages for the democratic process. . First, random selection reduces the chances of selecting highly qualified and motivated office holders and allows candidates with little or no experience to participate in the decision-making process, which could lead to government inefficiency. Second, since random selection is at the heart of this process, there is a risk of admitting into this process a group or individual whose opinions do not reflect the population they are supposed to represent, which could disrupt the legitimacy of the process. selection and “consent of citizens”. the governed.” Closely related to "equal rotation" or to random selection. In a representative democracy, individuals or.