From Party Politics to Pebbles
Why Democracy Needs to Forget Left and Right
This blog post is based on my recent appearance on the Democracy Innovators Podcast. Listen along over on their website.
I've been in four political parties. Four. Most people think that makes me either deeply principled or completely mad. I'm leaning towards the latter.
Each time I joined another party, I thought I'd found my political home. Each time I left, I realised the same thing: none of these parties actually fit what I believed. They were just the least worst option available.
That realisation led me to stand as the world's first AI-powered parliamentary candidate in Selby and Ainsty. Not because I love technology, though I do, but because I'd given up on the idea that anyone could represent what their constituents actually wanted while trapped inside a party system.
The Problem with Taking Sides
Here's what I learned from my political promiscuity: most people aren't left-wing or right-wing. They're just people with opinions that don't fit neatly into boxes.
You might support higher NHS spending but want tougher immigration controls. You might believe in free markets but think water companies should be nationalised. You might support transgender rights but worry about women's sports. Good luck finding a party that matches those views.
But our entire democratic system is built around the fiction that complex human beings can be sorted into two or three political tribes. It's like trying to organise a library by the colour of the book covers - technically possible, but completely useless if you're actually looking for something.
The ancient Athenians had a better idea.
You're a free citizen in ancient Athens (sorry, women and slaves, democracy hadn't figured you out yet). A big decision needs making. Should we execute Socrates? Should we go to war with Sparta? Everyone gathers at the Agora, listens to the arguments, and votes with a black or white pebble.
No parties. No manifestos. No whips telling you how to vote. Just the issue, the evidence, and your conscience.
It worked because people voted on actual problems, not tribal loyalty.
The Wisdom of (Honest) Crowds
There's a psychological experiment I'm obsessed with. Picture a jar filled with sweets. Let’s say, 3,000 jelly beans. You can run this experiment two ways.
First way: everyone can see previous guesses before making their own. People look at the numbers, get influenced by what others think, and adjust accordingly. The average guess is usually wrong.
Second way: everyone writes down their guess without seeing anyone else's. Pure intuition, no social pressure. The average guess is almost always spot-on.
The difference? Anonymity lets people think for themselves.
We proved this previously when I helped run a conversation in Ohio about gun control (arguably America's most toxic political issue). We brought together the most pro-gun NRA members and the most anti-gun activists we could find. Put them in an anonymous online discussion using a platform called Polis.
The result? They agreed on far more than anyone expected. No American should own weapons more powerful than the police carry. Universal background checks with cooling-off periods. Mental health restrictions, etc.
When I tell this story, Americans look at me like I've performed magic. But it's not magic. It's just what happens when you remove the theatre of politics and let people think.
Why We Built an Anonymous Democracy Tool
This is why we created Suffrago. Not because we're techno-utopians who think apps can fix democracy, but because we'd seen what happened when you gave people space to think beyond party lines.
The technology is inspired by Taiwan's vTaiwan system, which used similar tools to resolve impossible political conflicts. But the principle is ancient: give people the facts, let them consider different perspectives anonymously, and they'll usually find common ground.
We've run conversations about everything from Brexit to local planning decisions. The pattern is always the same. When people can speak without fear of being judged by their political tribe, they become more reasonable, more nuanced, more willing to change their minds.
It's democracy without the performance.
I don't think there's such a thing as left-wing and right-wing anymore. The old categories made sense when politics was about class and economics. Now it's about identity, culture, technology, climate, immigration.
Brexit proved this. You had working-class Labour voters joining forces with Tory grandees to leave the EU. You had liberal Conservatives campaigning alongside socialists to remain. The old tribal loyalties collapsed because the issue didn't fit the old categories.
Most political problems are like this now. They're too complex for binary thinking.
That's why we need tools that help people think in shades of grey rather than black and white. That encourage nuance rather than soundbites. That reward changing your mind rather than sticking to your guns.
Democracy doesn't need better politicians. It needs better ways for people to have better conversations.
The ancient Athenians understood this. They knew that democracy wasn't about having the right answers, it was about having the right process for finding them.
Time we remembered that.
Visit to Suffrago to have your say.