> did I say to you: "the current system is better than sortitioning"? no I didn't. we were never talking about that. if you'd like to discuss that separately, we can, and I suspect we'd agree, but I did not sign up for that discussion
Sigh. Well, I've always been talking about that, and I didn't sign up for this conversation either. In any case, though, here's what I said before you first replied to me: "This is actually why bribes to randomly selected citizens would be easier to catch."
Note that catching is not the same as convicting, and that's not mere pedantry. In order to convict, you have to catch first, and my claim is that in a political environment where the legislators are randomly selected, the kind of corruption you talk about would stick out like a sore thumb. Whereas in our current system, the revolving door between government and corporate lobbying is pervasive, so a former representative getting a cushy job when they leave it not even notable, it's commonplace, the norm. In a sense, it's harder to catch a criminal when everyone is a criminal. If that continued to be the norm under sortition, it would indicate a massive flaw in the new system. It's one of the problems that sortition ought to fix, otherwise we're no better off than before. So as I said, "After a maximum 1 year term, a randomly selected citizen would be expected to go back to their previous line of work." It's automatically suspicious if they don't! Regardless of whether there's a criminal conviction at the end, there would be a level of personal scrutiny regarding the acceptance of post-service jobs that doesn't exist now, especially because under sortition there would be very little if any practical value in the "experience" of a temporary legislator to a potential employer, i.e., political connections, networks, and knowledge that currently take many years to acquire.
On the matter of conviction, you seem to assume that the laws would remain exactly the same as before, whereas I make no such assumption. Rather, I assume that the laws would get stricter, so it would be easier to convict a government official of corruption. Our current elected representatives who make the laws are too easy on themselves, precisely because soliciting money from corporate donors is how they got into office in the first place, so they don't want to cut off their source of power. If somewhat more honest folks were in charge, they wouldn't allow legislators to get away with a lot of the crap that's currently allowed.