Key Arguments

• Rousseau claims that 'Election by lot would have few disadvantages in a real democracy,' indicating that in its proper setting sortition is not problematic.
• He specifies the conditions of such a real democracy: 'in which, as equality would everywhere exist in morals and talents as well as in principles and fortunes, it would become almost a matter of indifference who was chosen.'
• He immediately undercuts the practicality of this scenario by recalling his earlier argument: 'But I have already said that a real democracy is only an ideal.'
• Given the non‑ideal reality, he proposes a mixed rule: 'When choice and lot are combined, positions that require special talents, such as military posts, should be filled by the former;'
• He then assigns the lot to posts where common civic virtues suffice: 'the latter does for cases, such as judicial offices, in which good sense, justice, and integrity are enough, because in a State that is well constituted, these qualities are common to all the citizens.'

Source Quotes

The whole difference is that, having no life-ruler, we do not, like Venice, need to use the lot. Election by lot would have few disadvantages in a real democracy, in which, as equality would everywhere exist in morals and talents as well as in principles and fortunes, it would become almost a matter of indifference who was chosen. But I have already said that a real democracy is only an ideal.

Election by lot would have few disadvantages in a real democracy, in which, as equality would everywhere exist in morals and talents as well as in principles and fortunes, it would become almost a matter of indifference who was chosen. But I have already said that a real democracy is only an ideal. When choice and lot are combined, positions that require special talents, such as military posts, should be filled by the former; the latter does for cases, such as judicial offices, in which good sense, justice, and integrity are enough, because in a State that is well constituted, these qualities are common to all the citizens.

But I have already said that a real democracy is only an ideal. When choice and lot are combined, positions that require special talents, such as military posts, should be filled by the former; the latter does for cases, such as judicial offices, in which good sense, justice, and integrity are enough, because in a State that is well constituted, these qualities are common to all the citizens. Neither lot nor vote has any place in monarchical government.

Key Concepts

• Election by lot would have few disadvantages in a real democracy, in which, as equality would everywhere exist in morals and talents as well as in principles and fortunes, it would become almost a matter of indifference who was chosen.
• But I have already said that a real democracy is only an ideal.
• When choice and lot are combined, positions that require special talents, such as military posts, should be filled by the former;
• the latter does for cases, such as judicial offices, in which good sense, justice, and integrity are enough, because in a State that is well constituted, these qualities are common to all the citizens.

Context

Later portion of Book IV, Chapter III, where Rousseau qualifies the democratic suitability of lot by distinguishing an ideal, fully egalitarian democracy from real states, and then prescribes differentiated use of choice and sortition according to the functional requirements of offices.