Review Symposium in the Journal of Sortition: Can Deliberation Cure the Ills of Democracy?

About the Symposium

The symposium considers the central question of Fishkin’s book: whether carefully designed citizen deliberation can help address some of the most urgent challenges facing democracy today, including polarization, misinformation, declining trust, unequal influence, and the weakening of public judgment.

Across the symposium, contributors explore the promise, limits, design challenges, and institutional implications of Deliberative Polling and other forms of deliberative democracy. Fishkin’s response closes the exchange by engaging both the areas of broad agreement and the serious disagreements raised by the contributors.

Symposium Articles

“Can Deliberation Cure the Ills of Democracy? Overview of Published Book” by James S. Fishkin

Fishkin opens the symposium with an overview of Can Deliberation Cure the Ills of Democracy?, introducing the book’s argument for a more deliberative society and its case for integrating citizen deliberation more deeply into democratic life.

“Preface to Symposium: Review Symposium on James S. Fishkin, Can Deliberation Cure the Ills of Democracy?” by Jane Mansbridge

Mansbridge frames Fishkin’s book as an urgent response to a global crisis of democratic trust, writing that citizen deliberation by sortition can help “depolarize our most extreme partisan divisions,” protect electoral democracy, and provide an “essential but currently missing ingredient” in popular control. She also describes the symposium as emerging from “the great stimulation of Fishkin’s book” and concludes that the field has received a “big lift” from it.

“Deliberation Can’t Cure Democracy, But Might Save It” by John Gastil

Gastil writes that Fishkin’s newest volume “doesn’t disappoint,” but takes “a more complicated stance” on the book’s central question. He argues that fully curing democracy’s ills would require reforms that “go far beyond those that Fishkin proposes,” and he presses Fishkin on his “continuing dismissal of sortition” as a source of formal democratic authority. At the same time, Gastil applauds many of the book’s specific ideas, concluding that reforms such as Fishkin’s may help democracy manage its chronic symptoms and preserve the possibility of deeper reform.

“Making Democracy Think: But Who Sets the Question?” by Jane Suiter

Suiter describes Fishkin’s book as an “unusually evidence-rich answer” to democracy’s current crisis and an “urgently valuable guide” to what deliberation can achieve at scale. She calls the book a “remarkable consolidation” of deliberation’s capacity to improve public reasoning and reduce polarization, concluding that Fishkin makes democratic reform feel “not only desirable but testable.”

“Sortition, Elections and the Will of the People” by Cristina Lafont

Lafont writes that Fishkin’s book addresses “one of the most important and urgent political questions of our times”: how to revitalize democracy against autocratic and populist threats. She praises the book’s “wealth of (often striking) data” from decades of Deliberative Polls and says Fishkin’s innovations provide “a blueprint for a democratic system” that combines competitive elections with genuine citizen deliberation.

“Comments on Fishkin, Can Deliberation Cure the Ills of Democracy?” by Mark E. Warren

Warren calls Can Deliberation Cure the Ills of Democracy? an “excellent book” and writes that Fishkin’s central question is “now urgent.” He identifies a “standout feature” of the book: Fishkin shows how deliberative minipublics can strengthen democracy when inserted into legacy institutions, helping to reduce polarization and build a more deliberative democratic culture.

“A Contingency Theory of Sortition” by Jane Mansbridge

Mansbridge calls Deliberative Polls the “gold standard” in recruitment and attitude representation, emphasizing their distinctive ability to create deliberative samples that reflect the broader public. She also argues that the “calming, listening, and bonding qualities” of deliberative citizen groups are urgently needed in a world marked by polarization and conflict.

“Response to Commentaries: JoS Review Symposium on Can Deliberation Cure the Ills of Democracy?” by James S. Fishkin

In his response, Fishkin engages the symposium’s areas of “enthusiastic near-agreement” and “serious disagreements” in the spirit of deliberation. He clarifies the book’s central argument for a more deliberative society, responds to challenges from Gastil, Suiter, Lafont, Warren, and Mansbridge, and restates the aim of connecting the considered “will of the people” to what is actually done. Fishkin closes by describing the symposium as an example of “collective intelligence” helping to chart the way forward.