TED Conversations

Dale Retter


This conversation is closed.

Present democracy is like a verdict by a mob that does not attend a trial. Tribunocracy is a better way.

The single thing the world most needs now is better government. Our present system of mass public elections selecting government leaders and voting on referendum is equivalent to verdicts rendered by jurors that do not attend a trial. Better government requires a better system.

There is growing dissatisfaction with our election process, the role of money, and the ineffective government it produces Nevertheless reverence for the present form of democracy has largely precluded consideration of modifications substantial enough to significantly improve its substance. Tribunocracy is such a modification.

Tribunocracy utilizes Tribunes randomly selected from all the willing eligible potential voters. Like jurors in a court trial the selected Tribunes attend a public trial-like Tribunal Convention before voting. The majority vote of the Tribunes is a proxy for the majority vote of the entire pool of eligible voters. Tribunes serve only briefly, are dismissed after voting and retain no special power.

Tribunocracy reduces the role of money and shallow campaigning.

All Tribunes attend a public trial-like Tribunal Convention, before they vote. Like jurors in a trial, Tribunes are exposed directly to the candidates and testifying parties for hours, over a period of days. Thus it greatly reduces the need and value of paid advertising, and shallow slogan based campaign rhetoric. Dishonest claims, incorrect facts, and shallow arguments will be much less common; because the opposition will have adequate time and opportunity to dispute them by presenting better more persuasive evidence and arguments during the Tribunal Convention.

A quick dramatic change to Tribunocracy is not possible. However its gradual adoption is. Tribunocracy should and will first be introduced and tested in small special limited non-threatening non critical situations. For example, Tribunal Conventions might initially select officials not now elected such as city managers, or judges


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Dec 12 2012: I believe here would be little difference between tribunes and currently elected members of congress congress. Bribes do not have to be in cash. Democracy works best when more people become engaged in the process, not less.
    • thumb
      Dec 12 2012: Tribunes are like jurors in a trial; they are sequestered during the Tribunal Convention, and have no residual power afterwards. It is revered dogma that the more who vote the better. From Tribunocracy the Poem:

      As the number of voters grows,
      down in value each vote goes.
      Where a vote of ten thousand is small,
      the value of one vote is infinitesimal.

      Though it may cause despair,
      one vote is not worth bus fare.
      The noble vote is now like a cheer
      from a spectator seated in the rear.

      To vote
      is to emote
      without hope
      worth note.

      One vote is not worth great concern,
      when it will never an election turn.
      Where a vote is cheap,
      some behave like sheep.

      Rightly fearing Bullyocracy,
      most engage in hypocrisy.
      Our leaders say,
      to vote does pay.

      With heads tucked below reason,
      they say disbelieving is like treason.
      Yet it is from the soup of logic and reason,
      that good government gets its season.

      If mass public voting is the best way to reach a democratic decisions, why bother with jury trials? Why not let the parties make their case in the media and through paid advertisements, and then have everyone who wants to cast a vote? Hopefully, that would seem like a terrible idea, because you have already witnessed a much better system. Why is a jury trial necessary for a meaningful verdict, and not for an election. Could it be because we have not yet witnessed a better system?

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.