“Democracy is about discussion,” you open your article on so-called deliberative democracy, “not just voting” (“Ancient Athens Online,” May 8, 2010). British humor? I almost laughed out loud, at any rate. And then you go on to introduce the work of James Fishkin of Stanford University, whose main concern is to determine what people actually want, or what they would want were they well informed. As though this has anything to do with democracy, or at least democracy as it has come to pass. The world over, democracy is ever less about discussion. In most places it is strictly about voting. Even voting is not about issues that actually concern people, but about selection of those who will decide what to do about such issues with a modicum of discussion. Which is why democracy has turned into yet another form of manipulation of the many by a few. What is worse, people know it, too. To bring democracy back to credibility would require much more than Fishkin has to offer. First of all, it would require discussion about democracy itself.