Citizen assemblies don't require pre-existing expertise from participants. The inclusion of diverse individuals, like the homeless or elderly, changes the conversation's nature, fosters empathy, and provides a therapeutic function for the political body. This emotional and social bonding is considered at least as important as technical problem-solving.
It is difficult to hate or objectify someone when engaged in a direct, face-to-face conversation. The act of being physically present with an opponent forces an acknowledgment of their humanity, which is a prerequisite for respectful disagreement, empathy, and potential compromise.
Creative solutions often emerge from those not deeply entrenched in a problem. Using the analogy of medical 'grand rounds'—where doctors from unrelated fields consult on a difficult case—Chopra suggests that non-experts can 'think outside the box' precisely because they aren't confined by conventional knowledge.
While national politics can be divisive and disheartening, city-level initiatives offer hope. In a local context, people are neighbors who must collaborate, respect each other's humanity, and work towards a common goal of improving their community. This forced cooperation creates a positive, inspiring model for progress.
People often confuse empathy with agreement. In collaborative problem-solving, empathy is a tool for understanding. You can completely disagree with someone's perspective while still working to accurately understand it, which is the necessary first step to finding a solution.
While seemingly a threat to established power, Ireland's use of citizen assemblies actually reconciled the public with the political system. By integrating lot-based democracy for contentious issues like same-sex marriage, politicians gained legitimacy, making it an ironic case where the reform strengthened the very system it was meant to supplement or replace.
To encourage participation from everyone, leaders should focus on the 'why' behind an idea (intention) and ask curious questions rather than judging the final output. This levels the playing field by rewarding effort and thoughtfulness over innate talent, making it safe for people to share imperfect ideas.
Effective activism doesn't try to persuade politicians or stage a revolution. Instead, it should 'inject a retrovirus': build and run privately-funded alternative institutions (like citizens' assemblies) that operate on a different logic. By demonstrating a better way of doing things, this strategy creates demand and allows new institutional 'DNA' to spread organically.
Effective citizen assemblies require experts, but not in their traditional, top-down authoritative role. Experts must learn to be "on tap, not on top"—simplifying their language and responding to citizens' needs rather than dictating solutions. This creates a difficult but necessary learning curve, shifting the expert's role from a leader to a service provider.
Demanding empirical proof of a group's competence before granting them political power is a historical tactic used to disenfranchise people. Citing W.E.B. Du Bois, political scientist Hélène Landemore argues that true democracy requires a leap of faith: you must trust people with power first, and they will rise to the occasion and educate themselves.
Expecting politicians to vote themselves out of a job is unrealistic. The path to reform is a bottom-up approach, using numerous local citizen assemblies to prove their value. When politicians realize these assemblies can solve problems and reconcile people with the system, they will adopt them to secure their own legitimacy and hold onto power.