(disclaimer - I'm not an expert) This kind of democracy is what killed Socrates. No, really, the old Athenian system allowed citizens to participate much more

(disclaimer - I'm not an expert) This kind of democracy is what killed Socrates. No, really, the old Athenian system allowed citizens to participate much more directly, so when a moral panic started they could do really nasty stuff. Now, perhaps I'm being unfair. If you dig a bit deeper, you'll learn that Socrates was officially killed for impiety, and corrupting the young. Unofficially, he was killed for inspiring the Thirty Tyrants. It's debatable whether or not he was in any way responsible for their actions - Plato says no (though Plato was heavily biased) - but it seemed probable to a lot of people at the time. They couldn't get actually punish him for inspiring the Tyrants, because immunity was granted as part of a peace treaty, but when Socrates went ahead preaching his military dictatorship to a whole new generation, people got a bit upset. Sortition is actually quite a good idea - get a representative bunch of people, and let them debate the issue. It's a jury system. You don't want politicians to decide things, because they are the worst kind of decision makers (or so some people say). You don't want the uninformed populous to make decisions, because they are uniformed. So you get a sample of the populous, let them gather information, and then they can make an informed decision. Sure, Athens did some barbaric shit. But so did practically every other civilization at the time. The only thing to watch out for is people protecting their franchise - Athens stayed quite xenophobic and misogynistic, as the old Athenian men were the only ones who could vote, and didn't want their power being diluted.