Two weeks ago, Vice President Kamala Harris spoke with Fox News anchor Bret Baier. The “conversation” involved a series of provocative questions and provocative actions by Mr. Baier, followed by remedial responses and assertiveness from Mr. Harris. In a country where commentary is controversial and interviews resemble debates, meaningful “conversation” is difficult to achieve.
This topic is more important than ever, as Stanford students frequently participate in political activities. Many of us may have made up our minds about the presidential election. But in a polarized election like this one, voters everywhere, from pressured Pennsylvanians to Stanford University students, need to make their voices heard more forcefully than ever before.
Scoring political points over “the other side,” angry debates, fake interviews, and polarizing speech is the opposite of what is needed. Instead, meaningful conversations are key.
Meaningful conversations occur when diverse perspectives are offered and discussed thoroughly, when evidence and empirical reasoning are emphasized, when candidates are allowed to speak without interruption, and when underrepresented groups are encouraged to voice their opinions. It happens when you are given a fair platform to share. Deliberative democracy creates meaningful conversations.
In deliberative democracy, decisions are made by a randomly selected sample of individuals from the population, rather than by policy makers or officials. Due to its random nature, this sample is intended to be representative of the country’s demographics. They thoroughly discuss political topics, which lead to policy decisions. In this deliberative process, instead of polarized debates and circular logic, participants provide a balanced understanding of their respective perspectives through evenly moderated discussion.
With the 2024 elections rapidly approaching, deliberative democracy may seem irrelevant for the time being. But deliberative principles are a solution to political impasses, affecting everything from open forum social media platforms to everyday interactions.
On social media platforms, it is customary to express support for opinions you agree with and reject opinions you disagree with. Combined with algorithms, groups of like-minded users are formed on the site, encouraging other users to find their own “enclave.” Applied to politics, it creates emotional polarization, with members of the opposing party viewing the other party in an increasingly negative light.
Even beyond social media, emotional polarization is commonplace. The polarization is immense, from Republicans accusing Democrats of financial corruption to Stanford University students’ cries against conservative Judge Kyle Duncan. Despite Vice President Harris’ efforts to be considerate to conservative voters, former President Trump continues to spread polarizing misinformation.
With the 2024 elections rapidly approaching, this topic has become a matter of great concern. Major changes are needed to reverse Americans’ negative perceptions of politics and candidates. That change is deliberative democracy.
In 2019, CNN and Stanford University faculty tested the effectiveness of deliberative democracy with more than 500 people. What were the results? When people discussed politics considering both the opposing and supporting sides’ perspectives, many understood or even came close to the opposing side. This is reflected in the voting trends of individuals in the same group in the 2020 election.
These meaningful conversations do more than just reduce polarization. They help shape voters’ views specific Issues like abortion rights and climate change. Therefore, voters may be more likely to research candidates’ policy stances when making decisions, rather than voting solely based on their party affiliation.
Professor James Fishkin of Stanford University, a pioneer in the field of deliberative democracy and the inventor of deliberative polls, believes strongly in the merits of this system. Fishkin told the Daily that most people communicate with like-minded people and already consult sources that are appropriate for their point of view. Indeed, this is what America has seen with the increasing partisanship of media outlets like MSNBC and Fox News. Mr. Fishkin emphasized the importance of moderated dialogue with diverse perspectives to the overall health of a democracy.
Fishkin adopted deliberative democracy internationally with great success. In Bulgaria, for example, his team used the tool to discuss the situation of Roma, the most discriminated against group in Eastern Europe. For years, the Bulgarian government has perpetuated school segregation between Roma and Bulgarians. After adopting a deliberative approach among the population, desegregation was finally incorporated into Bulgarian education.
Recent research by Professor Fishkin’s team shows that the power of deliberation in depolarization remains a game-changer, even as the 2024 election approaches. In a report released in August 2023, they conducted a series of deliberative polling sessions and, through deliberation among diverse groups of Americans, found that a sample of pollsters had previously showed how they were able to garner higher bipartisan support on the subject.
However, important questions remain. That said, the process of actually implementing this system will be time-consuming and complex. Unfortunately, there are only six days left until Election Day. America cannot afford to wait for deliberative democracy to save the country.
So what can we do as individuals to learn from the principles of deliberative democracy? Professor Fishkin offers some wisdom on this issue.
“Think for yourself,” he said. “Think about the issues. Don’t just vote based on personality… Look at what candidates and parties at every level are proposing… Think through the smokescreen of vague platitudes.”
