Imagine a country where the people are so slow that a 1990 science poll found that half the adults weren't sure whether the sun revolved around the earth or the earth revolved around the sun. Now imagine that this same country has a system of government that not only bases its policies on the things that those people say, but subtly encourages them to remain ignorant about important policy issues.

Surprise! It's Canada!

That's right. Think of it: our government, in its wisdom, hires a polling firm to find out what we think of (say) global warming. Joe Blo knows all the stats of his favorite sports team, but can't tell the difference between a methane molecule and a giraffe. The polling firm relates Joe's opinions back to the appropriate government minister, and then that minister thinks up some suitably lame policy based on it. No wonder our various Liberal and Conservative governments are only now starting to get serious about the issue.

 

 

 
Now imagine a country where the main media outlets occasionally collaborate to gather a random sampling of its citizens to a central location to discuss a policy issue in depth. We're not talking about a two hour focus group session; we're talking about hundreds of citizens looking at all the ins and outs of a particular issue for a whole week. They have access to "balanced" briefing materials and are allowed to question competing experts.

Prior to the whole exercise, a normal poll is taken, and then at the end another normal poll is taken. And (surprise, surprise) the result changes significantly.

(By the way, the country is Britain, and the media outlets are the BBC and the newspaper, The Independent.)

The exercise is called a "deliberative poll".

 

 

 
A Harvard website (one of the links listed below) describes the drawbacks of the current system:

"[status quo] opinion polls, which measure the snap judgments of an often inattentive and ill-informed public."

As well:

"Deliberative Polling seeks to create a social environment in which ordinary citizens will be motivated to overcome the tendency toward rational ignorance (the notion that because a single individual’s opinion is unlikely to cast much influence on political decisions it is entirely reasonable to spend little time and effort becoming informed)."

 

 

 
I think the major cause of society's problems can be blamed on sheer ignorance. Thus, anything which promotes deliberation and dialogue--and which can help to translate the results of such dialogue into policy--can only be positive. Of course, the final decisions will always rest with our elected representatives, but at least they won't be pandering to the lowest common denominator of opinion polls based on the output of a nation of couch potatoes.

 

 
And, of course, the other great benefit is that the general public will become a lot less apathetic and cynical about the whole political process. They will see that their input is being taken seriously, so they'll naturally start to take the output (ie, government policies) seriously.
 

 

 

 
A deliberative poll is only a small subset of Deliberative Democracy. A deliberative democracy is one in which dialogue by the citizenry on important issue is seen as a vital element in policy formation. This can range from a simple deliberative poll to an elaborate Citizen's Assembly (see the B.C. and Ontario example below).

Deliberative Democracy will also introduce a general change in the culture of politics. If people from all backgrounds can gather together in a deliberative poll and calmly discuss important issues, it's conceivable that our leaders may eventually copy the example. And then Question Period in the House of Commons will no longer be an embarrassment to watch.

It must also be emphasized that Deliberative Democracy is a very effective tool in promoting community cohesion. And we will need every bit of community cohesion we can muster in the difficult times ahead.

 

Links

 

"Future Search Conferences" are a well tested method to get disparate stakeholders together and deliberate on issues of concern to the community.
 

The Deliberative Democracy Consortium, "a network of researchers and practitioners working together to strengthen the field of deliberative democracy."
 

A Stanford University site, "devoted to research about democracy and public opinion obtained through Deliberative Polling."
 

A very readable article on the subject by a staff writer at the Dallas Morning News.
 

This page focuses on the practical barriers and opportunities for deliberative democracy (from the University of Maryland).
 

Actual examples of deliberative democracy from around the world (from Auburn University in Alabama).
 

A mind-blowing miracle occurred in the Canadian province of British Columbia, when a random sample of citizens were allowed to deliberate and recommend what sort of electoral system the province should get. A follow-up referendum by the whole citizenry got to vote on the results. It was successful enough that Ontario is now copying it.
 

A lengthy examination of deliberative democracy, focusing on budgetary issues (from Harvard University).
 

A (very) short description of a Canadian example (from Macleans Magazine).
 

A HUGE number of links about deliberative democracy and related institutions.
 

An extensive site on the topic of "public journalism", which is journalism devoted to facilitating citizen engagement in the political arena.
 

Public Journalism is also often known as "civic journalism". This site is from the Pew Center for Civic Journalism.