This Deep Dive introduces and critically examines lottocracy, a system advocating for the random selection of legislators to counter the issues of elite capture and voter ignorance prevalent in traditional electoral democracies. The first source proposes a "Madisonian lottocracy" where randomly selected legislatures act as a "filtering" body for policy options, which are then presented to citizens for a jurisdictional referendum, aiming to foster accountability and authenticity without requiring blind deference. The second source specifically addresses the "accountability challenge" facing lottocracy, arguing that despite lacking traditional electoral mechanisms, lottocratic systems can achieve accountability through a defined relationship between legislators and ordinary citizens, reinforced by legal sanctions, social norms, and targeted ethical oversight, which differ from the structural pressures seen in electoral politics. Both sources highlight the potential benefits of lottocracy in enhancing democratic decision-making quality and responsiveness while acknowledging and attempting to overcome its inherent challenges regarding legislator accountability and the risk of blind deference from the citizenry.