**
In a recent address at the Liberal convention, Prime Minister Mark Carney painted a hopeful picture for the future, emphasising a vision of artificial intelligence (AI) that serves all Canadians, rather than just a privileged few. “Our goal is AI for all,” he stated, stressing the importance of governance rooted in Canadian values, accountability, and public service. However, political theorists Hélène Landemore and Peter MacLeod argue that our existing political framework may not be equipped to realise such aspirations.
The Case for Citizen-Led Governance
Landemore, a Yale professor and author of *Politics Without Politicians*, contends that the solution lies not in traditional political structures but in empowering ordinary citizens to take the reins. “The selection mechanism for legislators is partly at fault,” she explains, pointing out the oligarchic nature of political representation that favours socio-economic elites. This trend, she argues, has consistently led to a political system that serves the affluent, leaving the broader population disenfranchised.
MacLeod, a democratic innovator with over two decades of experience in organising citizens’ assemblies, echoes this sentiment. His latest book, *Democracy’s Second Act: Why Politics Needs The Public*, advocates for a shift towards a more participatory democracy. He believes that citizens should be more than passive spectators in the democratic process; they should actively engage and shape policy.
Empowering Ordinary Citizens
So, what does this empowerment look like in practice? MacLeod draws an analogy between citizens’ assemblies and juries, explaining how these gatherings bring together a diverse group of individuals to deliberate on specific topics over several days. Participants are not just passive recipients of information; instead, they engage in meaningful dialogue, share perspectives, and work towards consensus.
“What creates this solidarity and this kind of love is, often for the first time in people’s lives, they feel like they matter and they count,” MacLeod says. This genuine connection among participants can foster a sense of belonging and civic responsibility that is often missing in traditional political settings.
Landemore adds a poignant observation, noting that in her experience within these assemblies, participants often express their feelings of care and support for one another. “Within two to three meetings, most people in the assembly were starting to express their feelings for each other in the vocabulary of love,” she shares, highlighting the transformative power of inclusive dialogue.
Addressing the Challenges of AI Governance
As AI technology continues to advance, the challenges surrounding its governance intensify. Both theorists believe that citizens’ assemblies could be instrumental in navigating these complexities. “Elected legislatures are currently quite captured by the tech industry and incapable or unwilling to regulate,” Landemore remarks. She proposes that citizens could tackle critical questions about the trade-offs involved with AI use—such as environmental impacts and resource depletion—thus ensuring a more balanced and cautious approach to technology.
MacLeod envisions citizens’ assemblies yielding results that prioritise public good over corporate interests. “You’d expect citizens to be less interested in business success and quarterly returns, and much more focused on the social, environmental, and broader economic impacts at stake,” he explains.
The Role of Technology in Democracy
The discussion also touches upon the controversial notion that AI could replace human deliberation with “synthetic publics.” MacLeod expresses skepticism, arguing that technology should not be viewed as a solution to the disconnect many individuals feel from politics. “I don’t understand how introducing robots to the equation is supposed to rekindle that sense of solidarity,” he says.
Landemore reinforces this, asserting that the emotional connections fostered through human deliberation cannot be replicated by artificial agents. “The change of preferences that happens in deliberation is not just in reaction to good arguments—it’s also a reaction to the love and the solidarity you start feeling for the people with whom you deliberate,” she asserts.
Why it Matters
The conversation surrounding AI governance and citizen participation highlights a crucial juncture in Canadian democracy. As technology evolves, so too must our political structures. By reimagining governance to centre around citizen engagement and inclusivity, we pave the way for a more equitable future where the voices of all Canadians are heard and valued. This approach not only enhances democratic integrity but also cultivates a sense of community and belonging that is essential for a thriving society.
