Editing Randomization (section)

== In politics ==
The concept of randomization in political systems, specifically through the method of allotment or [[sortition]], has ancient roots and contemporary relevance, significantly impacting the evolution and practice of democracy.

In the fifth century BC, [[Athenian democracy]] was pioneering in its approach to ensuring political equality, or [[isonomia]].<ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Hansen |first=Mogens Herman |title=The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes |date=18 December 1998 |publisher=Bloomsbury Academic |isbn=1-85399-585-1}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last=Saxonhouse |first=Arlene W. |date=1993 |title=Athenian Democracy: Modern Mythmakers and Ancient Theorists |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics/article/abs/athenian-democracy-modern-mythmakers-and-ancient-theorists/56693FCAB73808C042E1455C9C437116 |journal=PS: Political Science & Politics |volume=26 |issue=3 |pages=486–490 |doi=10.2307/419988|jstor=419988 |url-access=subscription }}</ref> Central to this system was the principle of random selection, seen as a cornerstone for fair representation.<ref name=":1" /> The unique structure of Greek democracy, which translates to "rule by the people," was exemplified by administrative roles being rotated among citizens, selected randomly through lot. This method was perceived as more democratic than elections, which the Athenians argued could lead to inequalities. They believed that elections, which often favored candidates based on merit or popularity, contradicted the principle of equal rights for all citizens. Furthermore, the random allotment of positions like magistrates or jury members served as a deterrent to vote-buying and corruption, as it was impossible to predict who would be chosen for these roles.<ref name=":2" />

[[File:USCAR Court select juries by sortition.JPG|thumb|[[United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands|USCAR Court]] selecting a jury by sortition]]
In modern times, the concept of allotment, also known as [[sortition]], is primarily seen in the selection of [[Jury selection|jurors]] within Anglo-Saxon legal systems, such as those in the UK and the United States. However, its political implications extend further. There have been various proposals to integrate sortition into government structures. The idea is that sortition could introduce a new dimension of representation and fairness in political systems, countering issues associated with electoral politics.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Stone |first=Peter |date=July 2010 |title=The Political Potential of Sortition |url=https://academic.oup.com/pq/article-abstract/60/240/664/1447926 |journal=The Philosophical Quarterly |volume=60 |issue=240 |pages=664–666 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-9213.2010.660_11.x|url-access=subscription }}</ref> This concept has garnered academic interest, with scholars exploring the potential of random selection in enhancing the democratic process, both in political frameworks and organizational structures.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lever |first=Annabelle |date=2023-07-20 |title=Democracy: Should We Replace Elections with Random Selection? |journal=Danish Yearbook of Philosophy |volume=56 |issue=2 |pages=136–153 |doi=10.1163/24689300-bja10042 |issn=0070-2749|doi-access=free }}</ref> The ongoing study and debate surrounding the use of sortition reflect its enduring relevance and potential as a tool for political innovation and integrity.