TEDxDanubia
Brett Hennig: What if we replaced politicians with randomly selected people?
布萊特漢寧: 如果我們用隨機選中的人來取代政治人物會怎樣？
Filmed:
Readability: 4.1
1,634,208 views
如果你認為民主有問題，這裡有個點子：用隨機選中的人取代政治人物。作者兼行動主義者布萊特漢寧提出一種很令人信服的抽簽民主，或稱為政府官員的隨機選擇——這種體制深根在古雅典，它能發掘群眾的智慧，委託一般人為更大的群體利益做出平衡的決策。聽起來很瘋狂嗎？來聽聽要如何創造出一個沒有黨派組成的世界。
Brett Hennig - Author, activist
Brett Hennig co-founded and directs the Sortition Foundation, which campaigns to institute the use of stratified, random selection (also called sortition) in government. Full bio
Brett Hennig co-founded and directs the Sortition Foundation, which campaigns to institute the use of stratified, random selection (also called sortition) in government. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:12
I want to talk about
one of the big questions,
one of the big questions,
0
532
3522
我想要談的是一個大哉問，
00:16
perhaps the biggest question:
1
4078
2534
也許是最大的大哉問：
00:18
How should we live together?
2
6636
1840
我們要如何共同生活？
00:20
How should a group of people,
who perhaps live in a city
who perhaps live in a city
3
8500
4451
有一群人，也許住在同一個城市中，
00:24
or in the continent
4
12975
1159
或同一塊大陸上，
00:26
or even the whole globe,
5
14158
1284
或一起住在地球上，
00:27
share and manage common resources?
6
15466
2770
要如何分享和管理共同資源？
00:30
How should we make
the rules that govern us?
the rules that govern us?
7
18260
2952
我們要如何制定出管理我們的規則？
00:33
This has always been
an important question.
an important question.
8
21236
2301
這一直都是個重要的問題。
00:35
And today, I think
it's even more important than ever
it's even more important than ever
9
23561
2786
現今，它的重要性比以往更高，
00:38
if we want to address rising inequality,
climate change, the refugee crisis,
climate change, the refugee crisis,
10
26371
5110
可協助我們處理越來越嚴重的
不平等、氣候變遷、難民危機，
不平等、氣候變遷、難民危機，
00:43
just to name a few major issues.
11
31505
2580
以及許多其他的重大議題。
00:46
It's also a very old question.
12
34109
2706
它也是個很古老的問題。
00:48
Humans have been asking
themselves this question
themselves this question
13
36839
2398
人類一直自問這個問題，
00:51
ever since we lived
in organized societies.
in organized societies.
14
39261
2935
自從我們住在有組織的
社會開始就在問了。
社會開始就在問了。
00:54
Like this guy, Plato.
15
42220
2138
比如這個傢伙，柏拉圖。
00:56
He thought we needed benevolent guardians
16
44786
2125
他認為我們需要有仁心的守護者，
00:58
who could make decisions
for the greater good of everyone.
for the greater good of everyone.
17
46935
3736
由他們來為每個人的
更大利益做決策。
更大利益做決策。
01:02
Kings and queens thought
they could be those guardians,
they could be those guardians,
18
50695
3579
國王和皇后認為他們
能扮演那些守護者，
能扮演那些守護者，
01:06
but during various revolutions,
they tended to lose their heads.
they tended to lose their heads.
19
54298
3620
但在許多的革命中，
他們通常連頭都保不住。
他們通常連頭都保不住。
01:10
And this guy, you probably know.
20
58473
2398
這個傢伙，你們可能知道。
01:12
Here in Hungary, you lived for many years
21
60895
2071
在匈牙利，你會花很多年的時間
01:14
under one attempt to implement
his answer of how to live together.
his answer of how to live together.
22
62990
4077
在生活中嘗試實踐
他對於如何共同生活的答案。
他對於如何共同生活的答案。
01:19
His answer was brutal, cruel and inhumane.
23
67886
3079
他的答案很殘忍、殘酷，且沒人性。
01:23
But a different answer,
a different kind of answer,
a different kind of answer,
24
71315
3183
但有一個不同的答案，
一種不同的答案，
一種不同的答案，
01:26
which went more or less
into hibernation for 2,000 years,
into hibernation for 2,000 years,
25
74522
3865
已經沉睡了大約兩千年，
01:30
has had profound recent success.
26
78411
3117
這個答案在近期有了很深刻的成功。
01:33
That answer is, of course, democracy.
27
81552
2484
當然，這個答案就是：民主。
01:36
If we take a quick look
at the modern history of democracy,
at the modern history of democracy,
28
84839
3325
如果我們快速回顧一下
民主的現代史，
民主的現代史，
01:40
it goes something like this.
29
88188
1635
它是像這樣子的。
01:41
Along here, we're going
to put the last 200 years.
to put the last 200 years.
30
89847
3293
在這條時間橫軸上，
我們標出過去兩百年。
我們標出過去兩百年。
01:45
Up here, we're going to put
the number of democracies.
the number of democracies.
31
93164
3016
縱軸則是民主的數目。
01:48
And the graph does this,
32
96204
1928
而畫出的圖形是這樣的，
01:50
the important point of which,
33
98569
1826
這張圖的重點
01:52
is this extraordinary increase over time,
34
100419
3253
在於隨著時間出現了驚人的成長，
01:55
which is why the 20th century
35
103696
1778
這就是為什麼二十世紀
01:57
has been called the century
of democracy's triumph,
of democracy's triumph,
36
105498
3143
一直被稱為是民主勝利的世紀，
02:00
and why, as Francis Fukuyama said in 1989,
37
108665
3428
也是為什麼在 1989 年
法蘭西斯福山會說，
法蘭西斯福山會說，
02:04
some believe that we have reached
the end of history,
the end of history,
38
112117
3005
有些人認為我們已經
到達了歷史的終點，
到達了歷史的終點，
02:07
that the question of how to live together
has been answered,
has been answered,
39
115146
3662
要如何共同生活的問題
已經被解答了，
已經被解答了，
02:10
and that answer is liberal democracy.
40
118832
2480
答案就是自由民主。
02:13
Let's explore that assertion, though.
41
121696
2080
不過，咱們先來探究一下那主張。
02:15
I want to find out what you think.
42
123800
1856
我想要知道各位怎麼想。
02:17
So I'm going to ask you two questions,
43
125680
1889
所以我要問各位兩個問題，
02:19
and I want you to put your hands up
44
127593
1745
如果同意，
02:21
if you agree.
45
129362
1151
請舉手。
02:22
The first question is: Who thinks
living in a democracy is a good thing?
living in a democracy is a good thing?
46
130537
4278
第一個問題：有誰認為
生活在民主中是好事？
生活在民主中是好事？
02:27
Who likes democracy?
47
135246
1462
誰喜歡民主？
02:28
If you can think of a better system,
keep your hands down.
keep your hands down.
48
136732
3000
如果你能想出更好的體制，
請別舉手。
請別舉手。
02:31
Don't worry about those
who didn't raise their hands,
who didn't raise their hands,
49
139756
2492
別擔心那些沒舉手的人，
我相信他們沒有惡意。
02:34
I'm sure they mean very well.
50
142272
1400
02:35
The second question is:
51
143696
1509
第二個問題：
02:37
Who thinks our democracies
are functioning well?
are functioning well?
52
145229
3280
誰認為我們的民主運作得非常好？
02:41
Come on, there must be one politician
in the audience somewhere.
in the audience somewhere.
53
149908
3045
拜託，在觀眾席上
總會有一個政治人物吧。
總會有一個政治人物吧。
02:44
(Laughter)
54
152977
1100
（笑聲）
02:46
No.
55
154101
1150
沒有。
02:47
But my point is, if liberal democracy
is the end of history,
is the end of history,
56
155275
4704
但我的重點是，
如果自由民主就是歷史的終點，
如果自由民主就是歷史的終點，
02:52
then there's a massive paradox
or contradiction here.
or contradiction here.
57
160003
3611
那其實會有很大量的悖論或矛盾。
02:55
Why is that?
58
163967
1152
為什麼？
02:57
Well, the first question
is about the ideal of democracy,
is about the ideal of democracy,
59
165143
3851
第一個問題是關於民主的理想，
03:01
and all these qualities
are very appealing.
are very appealing.
60
169018
2850
所有這些特性都非常吸引人。
03:04
But in practice, it's not working.
61
172345
2016
但在實際上，是行不通的。
03:06
And that's the second question.
62
174385
1730
那就是第二個問題。
03:08
Our politics is broken,
our politicians aren't trusted,
our politicians aren't trusted,
63
176139
4184
我們的政治是破損的，
我們的政治人物不被信任，
我們的政治人物不被信任，
03:12
and the political system is distorted
by powerful vested interests.
by powerful vested interests.
64
180347
4140
政治體制被強大的既得利益給扭曲。
03:17
I think there's two ways
to resolve this paradox.
to resolve this paradox.
65
185259
3000
我想，有兩種方式能解決這種矛盾。
03:20
One is to give up on democracy;
it doesn't work.
it doesn't work.
66
188656
3279
第一，放棄民主；它沒有用。
03:23
Let's elect a populist demagogue
who will ignore democratic norms,
who will ignore democratic norms,
67
191959
3697
咱們來選出一位民粹煽動家，
他會忽視民主的規範，
他會忽視民主的規範，
03:27
trample on liberal freedoms
68
195680
1502
賤踏自由，
03:29
and just get things done.
69
197206
1633
來把事情搞定。
03:30
The other option, I think,
is to fix this broken system,
is to fix this broken system,
70
198863
3897
我想，另一個選擇就是
修復這個破損的體制，
修復這個破損的體制，
03:34
to bring the practice closer to the ideal
71
202784
2857
讓現實跟理想更接近，
03:37
and put the diverse voices of society
in our parliaments
in our parliaments
72
205665
3484
將社會的多元聲音
放入我們的國會中，
放入我們的國會中，
03:41
and get them to make considered,
evidence-based laws
evidence-based laws
73
209173
2984
讓國會制定出深思熟慮、
以證據為基礎的法律，
以證據為基礎的法律，
03:44
for the long-term good of everyone.
74
212181
2040
為每個人的長遠利益著想。
03:46
Which brings me to my epiphany,
75
214245
2293
這就要談到我的頓悟，
03:48
my moment of enlightenment.
76
216562
1635
我被啟發的時刻。
03:50
And I want you to get critical.
77
218221
1532
我希望各位能做批判。
03:51
I want you to ask yourselves,
"Why wouldn't this work?"
"Why wouldn't this work?"
78
219777
2799
我希望各位能問問自己：
「為什麼這會行不通？」
「為什麼這會行不通？」
03:54
And then come and talk to me
afterwards about it.
afterwards about it.
79
222600
2333
之後再來找我討論。
03:57
Its technical name is "sortition."
80
225363
2383
它的專業名稱叫做「抽簽」。
04:00
But its common name is "random selection."
81
228196
2452
但它的俗名叫做「隨機選擇」。
04:03
And the idea is actually very simple:
82
231029
2944
想法其實非常簡單：
04:06
we randomly select people
and put them in parliament.
and put them in parliament.
83
234537
3206
我們隨機選擇一些人，
把他們放到國會裡。
把他們放到國會裡。
04:10
(Laughter)
84
238148
1151
（笑聲）
04:11
Let's think about that
for a few more minutes, shall we?
for a few more minutes, shall we?
85
239323
2683
咱們花幾分鐘時間思考一下，好嗎？
04:14
Imagine we chose you and you
and you and you and you down there
and you and you and you down there
86
242030
4444
想像我們選中了你、你、
你、你，還有那邊的你，
你、你，還有那邊的你，
04:18
and a bunch of other random people,
87
246498
2031
以及一群隨機選中的人，
04:20
and we put you in our parliament
for the next couple of years.
for the next couple of years.
88
248553
3142
接下來幾年，把你們放到國會。
04:23
Of course, we could stratify the selection
to make sure that it matched
to make sure that it matched
89
251719
4269
當然，我們可以做分層選擇，
來確保選出的人
來確保選出的人
04:28
the socioeconomic and demographic
profile of the country
profile of the country
90
256012
3580
符合這個國家的社會經濟
和人口統計特性，
和人口統計特性，
04:31
and was a truly representative
sample of people.
sample of people.
91
259616
3382
確保這個樣本真的有代表性。
04:35
Fifty percent of them would be women.
92
263022
2578
這群人當中有 50% 會是女性。
04:37
Many of them would be young,
some would be old,
some would be old,
93
265624
2810
當中許多人是年輕人，有一些老人，
04:40
a few would be rich,
94
268458
1325
有少數的富人，
04:41
but most of them would be
ordinary people like you and me.
ordinary people like you and me.
95
269807
3982
但大部分會是和你我一樣的凡人。
04:46
This would be a microcosm of society.
96
274396
3699
這會是社會的縮影。
04:50
And this microcosm would simulate
how we would all think,
how we would all think,
97
278119
4212
這個縮影會模擬我們所有人的想法，
04:54
if we had the time, the information
98
282355
3044
前提是我們有時間、有資訊，
04:57
and a good process to come to
the moral crux of political decisions.
the moral crux of political decisions.
99
285423
4577
且有一個好的流程，
針對政治決策能達到道德的癥結。
針對政治決策能達到道德的癥結。
05:02
And although you may not be in that group,
100
290024
2063
雖然你可能不是那群人其中之一，
05:04
someone of your age,
someone of your gender,
someone of your gender,
101
292111
2151
有和你年齡相同的人、
和你性別相同的人、
和你性別相同的人、
05:06
someone from your location
and someone with your background
and someone with your background
102
294286
2873
和你所在相同的人、
和你背景相同的人，
和你背景相同的人，
05:09
would be in that room.
103
297183
1466
在那個房間中。
05:11
The decisions made by these people
would build on the wisdom of crowds.
would build on the wisdom of crowds.
104
299743
4120
這些人所做的決策
會以群眾的智慧為基礎。
會以群眾的智慧為基礎。
05:15
They would become more
than the sum of their parts.
than the sum of their parts.
105
303887
2396
他們會產生一加一大於二的效果。
05:18
They would become critical thinkers
106
306307
2024
他們會成為批判性思想家，
05:20
with access to experts,
107
308355
1820
有辦法接觸到專家，
05:22
who would be on tap but not on top.
108
310199
3132
有需要時專家都可以支援，
但他們不主導。
但他們不主導。
05:25
And they could prove
that diversity can trump ability
that diversity can trump ability
109
313355
3508
他們會證明在面臨廣大的
社會疑問和問題時，
社會疑問和問題時，
05:28
when confronting the wide array
of societal questions and problems.
of societal questions and problems.
110
316887
4860
多樣性能夠勝過能力。
05:34
It would not be government
by public opinion poll.
by public opinion poll.
111
322466
3855
這個政府不是民意投票選出的。
05:38
It would not be government by referendum.
112
326855
3190
這個政府不是公投選出來的。
05:42
These informed, deliberating people
would move beyond public opinion
would move beyond public opinion
113
330069
5207
這些消息靈通、深思熟慮的人，
能夠跳脫民意，
能夠跳脫民意，
05:47
to the making of public judgments.
114
335300
2614
做出公共判斷。
05:50
However, there would be
one major side effect:
one major side effect:
115
338866
3221
然而，會有一項很重大的副作用：
05:54
if we replaced elections with sortition
116
342724
2832
如果我們用抽簽取代選舉，
05:57
and made our parliament
truly representative of society,
truly representative of society,
117
345580
3688
並讓國會成員真正能夠代表社會，
06:01
it would mean the end of politicians.
118
349292
2849
那就意味著政治人物沒戲唱了。
06:04
And I'm sure we'd all be
pretty sad to see that.
pretty sad to see that.
119
352165
2499
我相信我們都會對此感到很傷心。
06:06
(Laughter)
120
354688
2098
（笑聲）
06:08
Very interestingly,
121
356810
1712
非常有趣的是，
06:10
random selection was a key part
of how democracy was done
of how democracy was done
122
358546
3689
在古代雅典，隨機選擇就是
06:14
in ancient Athens.
123
362259
1866
實行民主的關鍵。
06:16
This machine, this device,
is called a kleroteria.
is called a kleroteria.
124
364149
3373
這個機器，這種策略，
叫做「抽籤箱（kleroteria）」。
叫做「抽籤箱（kleroteria）」。
06:19
It's an ancient Athenian
random-selection device.
random-selection device.
125
367546
3483
它是古雅典的一種隨機選擇策略。
06:23
The ancient Athenians
randomly selected citizens
randomly selected citizens
126
371053
3223
古雅典人會隨機選擇公民，
06:26
to fill the vast majority
of their political posts.
of their political posts.
127
374300
4100
來擔任大部分的政治職務。
06:30
They knew that elections
were aristocratic devices.
were aristocratic devices.
128
378828
4075
他們知道選舉是貴族式的手段。
06:34
They knew that career politicians
were a thing to be avoided.
were a thing to be avoided.
129
382927
4206
他們知道，應該要
避免職業政治家的出現。
避免職業政治家的出現。
06:39
And I think we know these things as well.
130
387157
2507
我想我們都非常清楚這些。
06:41
But more interesting than
the ancient use of random selection
the ancient use of random selection
131
389688
3793
但，還有比古時使用
隨機選擇更有趣的事，
隨機選擇更有趣的事，
06:45
is its modern resurgence.
132
393505
2172
就是這個方式在現代再度復活。
06:47
The rediscovery of the legitimacy
of random selection in politics
of random selection in politics
133
395701
4730
近期，重新發現在政治上
採用隨機選擇的合法性
採用隨機選擇的合法性
06:52
has become so common lately,
134
400455
1864
變得非常常見，
06:54
that there's simply
too many examples to talk about.
too many examples to talk about.
135
402343
2686
常見到太多例子無法一一列舉。
06:57
Of course, I'm very aware
that it's going to be difficult
that it's going to be difficult
136
405053
2786
當然，我非常清楚，要在國會中
06:59
to institute this in our parliaments.
137
407863
2627
進行這個方式是非常困難的。
07:02
Try this -- say to your friend,
138
410514
1714
試試看對你的朋友說：
07:04
"I think we should populate our parliament
with randomly selected people."
with randomly selected people."
139
412252
3809
「我認為我們應該安排
隨機選中的人入主國會。」
隨機選中的人入主國會。」
07:08
"Are you joking?
140
416085
1165
「你在開玩笑嗎？
07:09
What if my neighbor gets chosen?
141
417274
1534
如果我鄰居被選上怎麼辦？
07:10
The fool can't even
separate his recycling."
separate his recycling."
142
418832
2475
那個蠢蛋甚至不會
做資源回收分類。」
做資源回收分類。」
07:13
But the perhaps surprising
but overwhelming and compelling evidence
but overwhelming and compelling evidence
143
421331
4746
但所有這些現代的例子，
都有驚人但具壓倒性說服力的證據，
07:18
from all these modern examples
144
426101
1921
07:20
is that it does work.
145
428046
1944
證明它確實行得通。
07:22
If you give people responsibility,
they act responsibly.
they act responsibly.
146
430014
4124
如果你給人責任，
他們就會負責地行事。
他們就會負責地行事。
07:26
Don't get me wrong -- it's not a panacea.
147
434678
2256
別誤會我，它不是萬靈丹。
07:28
The question is not:
Would this be perfect?
Would this be perfect?
148
436958
3008
問題並不是：這會很完美嗎？
07:31
Of course not.
149
439990
1151
當然不完美。
07:33
People are fallibly human,
150
441165
1365
人本來就很容易犯錯，
07:34
and distorting influences
will continue to exist.
will continue to exist.
151
442554
2940
失真扭曲的影響也將會一直存在。
07:37
The question is: Would it be better?
152
445875
2701
問題是：它會比較好嗎？
07:40
And the answer to that question,
to me at least, is obviously yes.
to me at least, is obviously yes.
153
448600
4628
這個問題的答案，至少對我而言，
很明顯是「會」。
很明顯是「會」。
07:45
Which gets us back
to our original question:
to our original question:
154
453252
3215
這就帶我們回到了原本的問題：
07:49
How should we live together?
155
457010
1941
我們要如何生活在一起？
07:50
And now we have an answer:
156
458975
1754
現在我們有了一個答案：
07:52
with a parliament that uses sortition.
157
460753
3361
用抽簽制的國會。
07:56
But how would we get from here to there?
158
464745
2848
但我們要如何從這裡到達那裡？
07:59
How could we fix our broken system
159
467617
2341
我們要如何修好破損的體制，
08:01
and remake democracy for the 21st century?
160
469982
3275
並為二十一世紀重製民主？
08:05
Well, there are several
things that we can do,
things that we can do,
161
473784
3222
嗯，我們能做的事有幾件，
08:09
and that are, in fact,
happening right now.
happening right now.
162
477030
3071
且事實上，這些事已經在進行了。
08:12
We can experiment with sortition.
163
480125
1842
我們可以針對抽簽做實驗。
08:13
We can introduce it to schools
and workplaces and other institutions,
and workplaces and other institutions,
164
481991
4229
我們可以將它導入學校、
工作場所，以及其他機構，
工作場所，以及其他機構，
08:18
like Democracy In Practice
is doing in Bolivia.
is doing in Bolivia.
165
486244
3087
就像實踐民主組織
（Democracy In Practice）
（Democracy In Practice）
在玻利維亞所做的一樣。
08:21
We can hold policy juries
and citizens' assemblies,
and citizens' assemblies,
166
489355
3198
我們可以舉辦
政策陪審團以及公民集會，
政策陪審團以及公民集會，
08:24
like the newDemocracy Foundation
is doing in Australia,
is doing in Australia,
167
492577
3034
就像新民主組織
（newDemocracy Foundation）
（newDemocracy Foundation）
在澳洲所做的一樣，
08:27
like the Jefferson Center
is doing in the US
is doing in the US
168
495635
2412
就像傑佛森中心（ Jefferson Center）
在美國所做的一樣，
在美國所做的一樣，
08:30
and like the Irish government
is doing right now.
is doing right now.
169
498071
2980
就像愛爾蘭政府現在正在做的一樣。
08:33
We could build a social movement
demanding change,
demanding change,
170
501508
2896
我們可以發起社會運動來要求改變，
08:36
which is what the Sortition Foundation
is doing in the UK.
is doing in the UK.
171
504428
3207
這就是分類基金會
（Sortition Foundation）
（Sortition Foundation）
現在在英國所做的。
08:40
And at some point, we should institute it.
172
508062
2420
在某個時點，我們得開始著手進行。
08:42
Perhaps the first step would be
a second chamber in our parliament,
a second chamber in our parliament,
173
510506
4278
也許第一步是在國會中
設置第二個會議廳，
設置第二個會議廳，
08:46
full of randomly selected people --
174
514808
2174
裡面都是隨機選中的人——
08:49
a citizens' senate, if you will.
175
517006
2294
公民參議員，你若這麼說也行。
08:51
There's a campaign
for a citizens' senate in France
for a citizens' senate in France
176
519324
3109
在法國，有一項公民參議員的活動，
08:54
and another campaign in Scotland,
177
522457
2247
在蘇格蘭也有，
08:56
and it could, of course, be done
right here in Hungary.
right here in Hungary.
178
524728
3079
當然，在匈牙利這裡也可以進行。
08:59
That would be kind of like a Trojan horse
right into the heart of government.
right into the heart of government.
179
527831
4940
那就會有點像是把特洛依木馬
直接送入政府中心。
直接送入政府中心。
09:05
And then, when it becomes impossible
180
533136
1981
一旦無法修補目前體制的裂縫時，
09:07
to patch over the cracks
in the current system,
in the current system,
181
535141
2555
09:09
we must step up and replace
elections with sortition.
elections with sortition.
182
537720
3223
我們必須站出來，用抽簽取代選舉。
09:13
I have hope.
183
541332
1254
我抱有希望。
09:14
Here in Hungary,
systems have been created,
systems have been created,
184
542610
2332
在匈牙利這裡已經建立了體制，
09:16
and systems have been
torn down and replaced
torn down and replaced
185
544966
2087
體制也曾被拆毀和取代。
09:19
in the past.
186
547077
1209
09:20
Change can and does happen.
187
548310
2816
能夠改變，確實也改變過，
09:23
It's just a matter of when and how.
188
551150
2612
只是時間和方式的問題。
09:25
Thank you.
(Hungarian) Thank you.
(Hungarian) Thank you.
189
553786
1603
謝謝。
（匈牙利語）謝謝。
（匈牙利語）謝謝。
09:27
(Applause)
190
555413
2604
（掌聲）
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Brett Hennig - Author, activistBrett Hennig co-founded and directs the Sortition Foundation, which campaigns to institute the use of stratified, random selection (also called sortition) in government.
Why you should listen
Before co-founding the Sortition Foundation, Brett Hennig wore a variety of hats: as a taxi driver, a software engineer, a social justice activist, a mathematics tutor and the primary carer of four boys. He finished his PhD in astrophysics just before his first son arrived.
After spending several disheartening years in civil society organizations and politics, Hennig became inspired by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri's trilogy on political philosophy and began investigating and researching network forms of democracy. The resulting book, The End of Politicians: Time for a Real Democracy, has been called "a book for visionaries" by New Internationalist contributing editor James Kelsey Fry and described as "a powerful critique and provocative alternative" by Professor Erik Olin Wright of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Hennig has given many talks promoting sortition and has contributed a chapter, "Who needs elections? Accountability, Equality, and Legitimacy under Sortition," to the forthcoming book Legislature by Lot: Transformative Designs for Deliberative Governance (Verso, 2019).
Brett Hennig | Speaker | TED.com