THE GAMIFICATION OF DEMOCRACY: GAMES, DEMOCRACY, AND DELIBERATIVE PROCEDURALISM

Abstract

What are games? What is democracy? Why is it important that democracy is not a game? This paper hopes to answer those questions. Games give us clear and precise worlds to be a part of for just a few moments. Democracy allows the people to select and hold accountable their government. Relying on the work of C. Thi Nguyen to discuss games and Joseph Schumpeter to discuss democracy, I argue that we ought not to treat democracy as a game. I suggest that Schumpeter portrays democracy as democracy gamified and offer reasons for why this is bad. Nguyen’s work can help us understand the problems of gamification and why we should avoid gamifying vast parts of our lives. After discussing what is good about games and what is bad about gamified democracy, I end with a version of democracy that resists gamification and rejects Schumpeter's definition of democracy. I offer deliberative proceduralism as a form of democracy that resists the simplifications of gamified democracy and asks us to treat democracy as the serious and impactful subject that is it.