A pilot study will take place prior to the Canadian Federal Election. Three citizen evaluation committees, from Kimberley, Cranbrook, and Nelson, will evaluate and rank the candidates running in the Federal election for the Kootenay Region. The Foundation for Democratic Political Advancement will assess the Committees' evaluation and ranking, and make an overall evaluation and ranking of the Kootenay candidates.
A possible pilot study of Evaluative Democracy (for the Canadian Federal Election) may also take place in the East Side of Vancouver, British Columbia.
Upcoming New Zealand General Election
A Canadian evaluation committee will evaluate and rank the candidates running in the New Zealand General election.
2008 U.S. Presidential Election
A Canadian evaluation committee will evaluate and rank the six top candidates running in the U.S. Presential election.
Anyone interested in participating in these pilot studies, please contact
Evaluative Democracy
Books on Evaluative Democracy:
The Critique of Reasonableness: A Method To
End Partiality by Stephen Garvey
A
method for the determination of the comparative reasonableness of human
thought. In the book, Garvey shows the theory of more reasonableness, and demonstrates 100 examples of its application. (The methodological basis for Evaluative Democracy.)
Evaluative Democracy: A Shift to Democracy by Stephen Garvey
A theoretical extension off The Political Evaluator, Evaluative Democracy entails a detailed critique of the western political system and presentation of an (idealistic) version of Evaluative Democracy. This book, academic in nature, is intended for the political theorists and students of democracy.
The Political Evaluator by Stephen Garvey
Using Platonic dialogues, The Political Evaluator shows the necessity for political change in western society, and the benefits of Evaluative Democracy for the people. Due to the dialogue format, the book is accessible to most adult readers.
Anti-Election by Stephen Garvey
A look at the globalization of elections and a sound, progressive case for their end. Also, the book examines Evaluative Democracy as a viable democratic alternative to western or liberal democracy. (Due to platonic dialogue framework, Anti-Election is accessible to most people.)
Example of the Methodology of Evaluative Democracy:
Challenge the Philosophy Competition 1
This competition is based on determining the more reasonable philosophical argument (as opposed to more reasonable political candidate).
Also, see the definition of "more reasonable" as used in the competition: Definitions for Competition
Introduction to Evaluative Democracy
Evaluative Democracy is a democratic political system based on the usage of citizen evaluation committees to determine who are the political representatives.
Evaluative Democracy is a political way of thought based on the collective (or community or society) interest,
whereby government and political decisions are made based on what (choice) is better for the
community interest.
Evaluative Democracy, by emphasizing the collective interest, is about democracy, the people and
the benefit of the people.
Pilot Study of Evaluative Democracy (Funded by the FDPA)
2007 Lethbridge Civic Election:
An evaluation and ranking of the Alderman candidates who ran in the 2007 Lethbridge civic election. Evaluation based on establishing the basic priorities of Lethbridge, gathering information on the Alderman candidates, and evaluating the candidates based on the basic priorities.
On October 3, 2007, a FDPA public forum on basic community priorities of the Lethbridge was held at the Lethbridge Public Library.
On October 10, 2007, a FDPA presentation of a detailed evaluation and ranking of the Alderman candidates was given at the Lethbridge Public Library.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (pdf file) of the FDPA Evaluation and Ranking of the Lethbridge Alderman candidates.
FULL EVALUATION AND RANKING DOCUMENT (pdf file). Included in the Document are the seven questions asked by the FDPA, and the Alderman candidates' answers.
In this pilot study, the FDPA evaluated and ranked the nine Alberta provincial parties and their policies. The evaluation and ranking was based on seven basic priorities of the Alberta public.
An evaluation committee made up of three members (non-Albertans) did the evaluation and ranking, and a fourth member (non-Albertan) did an independent critique of the work.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (pdf file) of the FDPA Evaluation and Ranking of the Alberta political parties.
VIDEO of committee working on the health policies of the Alberta political parties: Committee
VIDEO of committee working on the environmental policies of the Alberta political parties: Committee
2008 Taiwan Referendum on U.N. membership (March 22, 2008):
In this study, an FDPA evaluation committee did a detailed evaluation of whether or not, the people of Taiwan should agree to the Taiwan government applying for U.N. membership under the name of "Taiwan."
To do the evaluation, the FDPA committee established the basic priority of the Taiwan people, and used that priority to evaluate choices of either applying for U.N. membership or not applying for U.N. membership.
Synopsis: Based on the preservation of the Taiwan identity/existence, the
evaluation results favor 71.6% to 35% Taiwan becoming a formal
independent State versus Taiwan becoming part of China.
However, based solely on the risk to world peace, the evaluation results
favor 65% to 20% Taiwan becoming part of China versus Taiwan
becoming a formal independent State.
This is the Taiwan dilemma. (Independence versus world peace.)
The FDPA concludes that Taiwan should press ahead with independence,
because of its right to self-determination, and the onus should be on the
world, not Taiwan, to deal with China’s intimidation and isolationist policy
towards Taiwan. For Taiwan to put off independence because world powers
are unwilling to act decisively against China, even though they are capable
of acting decisively, would be contrary to the very existence of being
Taiwanese.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (pdf file) of the FDPA Evaluation of the Taiwan referendum on U.N. membership.
The Issue of Whether or Not Democratic Countries Should Participate in the 2008 China Beijing Olympics:
On May 22 2008, a FDPA citizen evaluation committee from the Kootenays evaluated whether or not democratic countries should participate in the China Beijing Olympics. In addition to providing a detailed evaluation and determination of the China Beijing Olympic issue, the evaluation represents an example of public decision-making (and government decision-making in terms of methodology) in Evaluative Democracy.
The FDPA evaluation was guided by establishing a basic priority for democratic countries and applying that priority to the various issues surrounding the Beijing Olympics and Chinese human rights issues. The evaluation encompassed discussion on relations between the Chinese government and Taiwan, Mongolia (i.e. Uighur Mulsims), Tibet, Burma, and Sudan, Chinese civil liberties, Chinese legal system, and Chinese legislation such as the One-Child policy and Capital punishment.
Synopsis: Based on the right to freedom expression, religion, culture, self-determination, and self-preservation, the FDPA evaluation committee determined 70% to 40% that China is unworthy of hosting the 2008 Olympics. Moreover, the evaluation committee determined 64% to 36% that democratic countries had a right to interfere in China's internal affairs, and 92% to 8% that the Olympics is not devoid of politics. However, the evaluation committee determined 66% to 34% that athlete rights precede human rights in the context of the Olympic games.
In terms of action by democratic countries, the evaluation committee determined that a Chinese pardon of human rights prisoners and full participation in the Olympics (92%) would be the best action, followed by boycott of the opening ceremony (84%), and full partipation in the Olympics (76%). Participation (in the Olympics) was valued over non-participation, due to the benefits of intercultural understanding and dialogue.
The key question raised in conclusion and in consideration of the unworthiness of China to host the Olympics, is why China in the first instance won the IOC Olympic bid?
VIDEO of committee working on the issue of whether or not China is unworthy to host the Olympics:
unworthy to host? (Two other video parts on youtube as well.)
VIDEO of committee working on the issue of whether or not foreign countries have right to interfere in China's internal matters: right to interfere?
Upcoming Studies of Evaluative Democracy
Baker Mountain Land Development Issue:
Two FDPA committees will evaluate the 5812.18 hectares land development proposals for outside of Cranbrook, BC, Canada.
The Baker Mountain Land development proposals pertain to crown lands, and therefore they are under the jurisdiction of the BC provincial government. The BC government through the Ministry of Tourism, Sport, and Arts, Resort Development Division has begun the process of evaluating the proposals. The Cranbrook public and relevant agencies were consulted, and the Resort Development Division, out of Kamloops, compiled a major issues list. The major issues list is used to evaluate whether or not the proposals will go forward. However, the major list fails to account for public comments against the proposed development itself. The comments were directed at preservation of the beauty and sanctity of the Baker Mountain area and maintenance of the quality of life vis-à-vis overcrowding, increased noise and pollution, harm to the environment including wildlife and beauty of the area from the development, and decreased local social harmony. (Note, 44% of recorded public comments were directed at quality of life and sanctity of the Baker Mountain area.)
The Resort Development Division says that it will deal with the major issue of "quality of life" at the Resort Master Plan Stage (i.e. late in the process). However, by doing so, the Resort Development Division is putting resort development before quality of life, because the resort will be close to approval at the Master Plan Stage. Also, the Resort Development Division did not add "quality of life" to its major issues list for the Baker Mountain area or even mention it, even though Psyche Brown from the Resort Development Division conceded that "quality of life" is a major issue. Clearly, the BC government is pro-development at the expense of quality of life.
The FDPA committee will evaluate an all season resort development based on the basic priorities of clean, accessible drinking water, clean air, social cohesion of rural community, rural living without the pollution, overcrowding, crime of urban areas, protection of environment and its beauty, public access to outdoor recreation, and sustainable employment. The evaluation will determine the degree to which an all season resort will add or compromise the existing quality of life and sanctity of the Baker Mountain area. (Note, the Resort Development Division has declined on doing this important evaluative step.)
This FDPA evaluation will provide a logical basis to approach other land development issues, and be an example of both public decision-making under an Evaluative Democratic system and a land development evaluation which examines development itself.
2008 Canadian Federal Determination:
A pilot study will be conducted in British Columbia, the Kootenay region. Three citizen evaluation committees will be formed in Kimberley, Cranbrook, and Nelson. The FDPA evaluation committees will evaluate and rank the Kootenay candidates running in the Federal Election. The FDPA will then assess the results of the three committees to determine an overall evaluation and ranking of the Kootenay candidates.
The basic evaluation process is to first establish the basic priorities of the community, and then use the basic priorities to evaluate and rank the candidates. (In the case of the Kootenays, the established basic prorities of the Kootenays and Canada as a whole will be used to evaluate the Kootenay candidates.)
The three evaluation committees will be involved in public forums in Kimberley, Cranbrook, and Nelson to establish the basic priorities of the Kootenays and Canada as a whole. Also, the committees will draw on media and academic research of the main issues of the Kootenays and Canada to determine these prorities. Moreover, the evaluation methodology will rely on both qualitative and quanitative analysis, and a weighting system. Though the emphasis will be on qualitative analysis. (Quantitative analysis will be used only as a means to make the qualitative analysis more precise.)
A summary of the evaluation and ranking results of each committee and a summary of the overall evaluation and ranking will be released to the media prior to the Federal election. Moreover, the full evaluation and ranking documents of the three committees, and the overall evaluation and ranking document of the FDPA will be put online.
The purposes of this pilot study are to further test the evaluative democratic system, inform the Kootenay public of the political candidates running in the Federal election for the Kootenay region, and educate the public about alternative democratic systems.
2008 New Zealand Determination:
A FDPA evaluation committee made up of Canadian citizens will evaluate and rank the New Zealand candidates according to who is the better representative for New Zealand as a whole.
The evaluation process is guided by establishing the basic priorities of New Zealand, and then use those priorities to evaluate and rank the candidates running in the New Zealand election. (The FDPA committee will determine these priorites by researching the main issues in New Zealand, and reaching consensus on what the priorities should be.) Moreover, the evaluation methodology will rely on both qualitative and quanitative analysis, and a weighting system. Though the emphasis will be on qualitative analysis. (Quantitative analysis will be used only as a means to make the qualitative analysis more precise.)
An executive summary and full evaluation and ranking document of the FDPA committee's evaluation and ranking will be released to the media prior to the New Zealand election and put online.
The purposes of this study are to further test an evaluative democratic system, inform the New Zealand public about the political candidates running in the New Zealand election (from an objective, non-partisan, outside perspective), and educate the public about alternative democratic systems.
2008 U.S. Presidential Determination:
A FDPA evaluation committee made up of Canadian citizens will evaluate and rank the U.S. Presidential candidates according to who is the better representative for the United States as a whole. (The committee will focus on three top Presidential candidates: Republic nominee, Democrat nominee, and Reform nominee if it is Ralph Nader.)
The evaluation process is guided by establishing the basic priorities of the United States as a whole, and then use those priorities to evaluate and rank the candidates running in the U.S. Presidential election. (The committee will determine these priorites by researching the main issues in the United States, and reaching consensus on what the priorities should be.) Moreover, the evaluation methodology will rely on both qualitative and quanitative analysis, and a weighting system. Though the emphasis will be on qualitative analysis. (Quantitative analysis will be used only as a means to make the qualitative analysis more precise.)
An executive summary and full evaluation and ranking document of the FDPA committee's evaluation and ranking will be released to the media prior to the U.S. Presidential election, and put online.
The purposes of this study are to further test an evaluative democratic system, inform the U.S. public about the candidates running in the U.S. Presidential election (from an objective, non-partisan, outside perspective), and educate the public about alternative democratic systems.
***VIDEO of Stephen Garvey on Anti-Election (Video recorded on January 17, 2007):
Duration of (shortened) video: 58 seconds. Double click 'play' button to start video. (No download time.)
*** FULL VIDEO: To view the entire video of Stephen Garvey see Full Video
*** Special, limited spiral bound edition also available for reduced prices:
9.75 U.S.A. (not including shipping) for
North American and international orders
7.65 EURO.
10.95 CAN.
Anti-Election is a timely, controversial, progressive critique of Electoral Democracy. The book is presented in eight presentations, which are based on actual events and facts.
Through the persona of Thompson, a philosopher presenting at the United Nations, the book examines:
1.the nature of elections
2.the globalization of elections
3.the effects of Electoral Demcracy on humanity as a whole,
4.and offers a viable, more democratic alternative to elections.
Anti-Election includes bibliographical references.
Anti-Election's unrelenting inspection of Electoral Democracy exposes it as an autocratic hierarchy of (undemocratic) political power defined by the ability and means of dominant political parties and candidates and their supporters to influence and manipulate the people.
Review:
"The Age of Reason project - the quantification and rationalization of all things - is in crisis. As we settle into the new millennium, this isn't a very controversial view. Powerful forces of both progressive and reactionary stripes confront elements of this on all fronts, from liberal capitalism to modernity. Radical Islam and rightwing Christianity both openly attack the rational consensus and its institutions, from the World Bank to the UN, the IMF to the European Union.
As the highest political attainment of the Age of Reason, democracy also faces significant challenges to its legitimacy. Western democracies increasingly confront, with varying degrees of success, oligarchic pressures and declining voter involvement, while power formerly held by nation-states seeps into the hands of multinational corporations. Democracy, in a manner nearly unimaginable in the 20th Century, has to defend its egalitarian claims from other forms of voter consent.
This manifests itself in, for example, the Bolivarian revolution socialism of the emerging Chavists democracies. Historian J.P. Nettl describes an approach to the concent of the governed of which Hugo Chavez would approve. This "view of democracy postulated action first and foremost - action which anticipated the expressed or if necessary deduced needs of the population: a commitment not a mandate. Such a conception might short measurable criteria like majority votes, which bourgeoise democracy valued so highly, but it was long on unmeasurable but much more real links of action which bound leaders and mass."
Further, we are increasingly reminded that, contrary to the Bush Administration view, democratic elections routinely put in power anti-democratic regimes. Elections in Russia, Iran, and the Palestinian Authority prove once again a lesson that Senator John C. Calhoun explained in 1851 in A Disquisition on Government: majoritarian democracies are routinely comfortable making aggressive war and tyrannizing minorities in their midst. And while President Bush may believe that democracies don't fight wars, much evidence exists to the contrary.
Conscious of the crisis of legitimacy that liberal democracy faces, author Stephen Garvey has chosen to light a candle rather than curse the dark. His new book, Anti-Election, outlines a different approach to democracy and creating a legitimate government with the consent of the governed. His books lays out his idea of evaluative democracy, a method of selecting elected representation by creating citizen review commissions that determine what is most important to the society to be governed, questioning aspirants to governing positions, and evaluating those answers for their applicability to and insight into the issues that are determined to be most important. Through a series of collaborative evaluations, the best people would be chosen to serve.
The book is structured as a series of presentations about Garvey's ideas to the UN General Assembly. This doesn't make for very engaging reading - you sometimes feel like you're reading a 500-page Power Point presentation - but it does make clear Garvey's position. His ideas merit discussion and his efforts to find humane alternatives to the democratic elections of bourgeoisie liberal democracy are laudable.
Ultimately, Garvey's views belong to a class of ideas that also includes the work of Brazil's Partido dos Trabalhadores (the Worker's Party or PT), a political party who has inaugurated municipal budgeting through a series of citizen meetings, a process called the orcamento participativo or participatory budget. This approach, discussed in Hillary Wainwright's Reclaim the State(2003), merits consideration by the serious student of Garvey's approach.
Where it would be easy to give in to despair, Stephen Garvey makes a valiant effort to build a new form of just government. While the first part of his book, which diagnoses the crisis of liberal bourgeoisie democracy, is ultimately more convincing than his prescription, Garvey deserves credit for trying to design a viable alternative to a system we all know to be broken."
Keith McCrea Verbicide magazine (20th issue)
Mr. Stephen Garvey
The Political Evaluator: Shatters the myth that elections are democratic, and offers a viable, democratic alternative to elections.
Readers--share your views of The Political Evaluator at reviews (The reviews will be posted.)
Before a prestigious society made up of top academics and distinguished professionals, Peter Thompson, a publicly unknown thinker and visionary, presents eight lectures which critiques elections and then puts forward a unique and more viable option where the hierarchy of political power is replaced by a new democratic paradigm of More Reasonableness (a fully elucidated process in which ideas rather than ballots are cast).
What ensues is a lively, thorough, diverse dialogue, which touches on the very bases of society and democracy.
Review Comments:
“A somewhat controversial yet visionary interpretation of democracy, The Political Evaluator is well researched, well presented and encourages readers to think beyond the existing limitations of our current western political system. Garvey proposes a thought provoking ideology, worthy of serious consideration and unavoidable deliberation.”
Tina Cobb
The Collective Writing Co.
"The Political Evaluator presents a bold and very needed alternative to our present western socio-political climate. This book needs to be read not just by those who operate in the theoretical or philosophical, but by those who are living in and acting in this world we all inhabit."
Letters to
Evaluative Democracy 
