Every year, during the first two weeks in October, the American Bahá’í community holds elections in 158 electoral districts across the country. The purpose of these “unit conventions” is to elect delegates who will subsequently elect the national governing body of the Bahá’í community. A similar process occurs in over 180 other countries around the world. As Bahá’ís participate in this process, they are not merely electing their own governing bodies. They are constructing a new model of democratic governance from the ground up.

So how do Bahá’í elections work?

The election process has no nominations and no campaigns. In fact, it has no competition of any form because, in the Bahá’í system, governance is not structured as a contest of power. Rather, it is a call to service. In this regard, every adult has an opportunity to vote, is eligible to be voted for, and has a responsibility to serve if elected.

Voting is conducted in a reverent atmosphere in which each person casts a secret ballot that reflects their personal assessment of who, in their electoral unit, has the integrity and capacity to serve in an elected capacity. There are no discussions before or during the process, so no vote is influenced by anyone else’s opinions. And if anyone seeks to solicit votes in the period leading up to the election, this is considered a display of ego indicating the person is not fit for selfless service to the community.

In this way, voters exercise true freedom of choice in voting. Partisan filtering processes are completely absent, as are the biasing influences of campaign rhetoric and punditry.

Individuals who cannot attend the convention are free to mail their ballot in advance. For those in attendance, the balloting process takes only a matter of minutes. When the ballots are counted, those individuals who are named the most frequently on ballots are elected to a form of service they had not sought, but are well qualified for.

Since there was no campaigning (and hence no campaign financing), and since the elected members did not seek election (or re-election), and since they were elected based on the community’s collective but unspoken assessment of their integrity and capacity for selfless service, the corrupting influences of ego and money are eliminated from the electoral processes.

This same basic process is also used to elect governing bodies at the local, national, and international levels of the Bahá’í community. And it has proven itself effective in every culture on earth.

Given the crisis of legitimacy facing so many democracies around the world today, it is worth reflecting on several insights that might be drawn from the Bahá’í experience.

First, when it comes to democratic governance, processes of social innovation need not, and indeed have not, come to an end.  Prevailing systems of partisan democracy were remarkable historical accomplishments when they first emerged. But they emerged over 200 years ago. It’s time to take stock of all of the lessons learned in those 200 years and begin the difficult but necessary process of constructing viable systems of democratic governance for the twenty-first century and beyond.

Second, tinkering with minor aspects of the partisan political system, such as campaign finance reforms and term limits, will never be sufficient. Rather, some of the deepest underlying assumptions need to be revisited. This includes the assumption that democratic governance is best structured as a contest for power. Contests of power inherently privilege those with the most power. Structuring governance this way merely serves the narrow interests of those segments of society with the most power.

Third, while open-minded observers might be attracted to the structure of the Bahá’í electoral system, it is important to recognize that such a system could never be imposed from above, nor could it be adopted overnight. Rather, the system is only possible when participation is supremely voluntary, and it only works to the degree that a culture of mature participation is cultivated over time. The Bahá’í community has been constructing this system, learning what it takes to make it work, and fostering a culture that supports it, for almost one hundred years. The community’s success, in this regard, has been built on the simultaneous development of systems for the spiritual education and empowerment of growing numbers of participants, beginning in their formative years. Thus the Bahá’í community recognizes the mutually interdependent process by which individuals and the institutional structures they participate in must develop and mature together.

With that said, skeptics might argue that it is naïve or unrealistic to try to extrapolate, from the experience of the Bahá’í community, lessons that might be applied to democratic electoral processes in large, complex, pluralistic nation-states. Yet one could argue that it is even more naïve and unrealistic to assume that any nation can continue to cling to partisan systems that have been deeply corrupted by money and special interests, have lost the respect of the populations they purport to serve, and are proving increasingly incapable of addressing the challenges now facing humanity. Thus it seems fair to suggest that, at a minimum, it is time to begin a searching conversation about the reinvention of democracy.

As Bahá’u’lláh, the founder of the Bahá’í Faith, wrote over a century ago: “The signs of impending convulsions and chaos can now be discerned, inasmuch as the prevailing order appeareth to be lamentably defective… Soon will the present-day order be rolled up, and a new one spread out in its stead.”

But this crisis should not come as a surprise. After all, the structure of contemporary democracy – governance as a partisan contest of power – is over 250 years old.  This structure was conceived before the invention of the steam engine, railroads, electricity, the light bulb, the automobile, airplanes, radio, television, telephones, the atomic bomb, computers, multi-national corporations, the internet – and virtually every other feature of modern life. So it should be no surprise that partisan democracy has become an anachronism that is incapable of managing the problems now facing humanity.

What is needed now is a reinvention of democratic governance from its most basic assumptions on up. The partisan contest of power must be replaced by the call to self-less service within systems characterized by principled collective decision making. Contests of power inherently invite the corrupting influence of money; reduce complex issues to simplistic slogans; confound long-term planning and global responsibilities; and exert a corrosive influence on the human spirit. This is what people everywhere are beginning to recognize – especially young people, who see partisan democracy for the anachronism that it is.

Following the recent revolution in Egypt, the Bahá’ís of that country issued an open letter to their fellow Egyptians, inviting an authentic dialogue regarding the construction of a just and sustainable system of governance. In that letter they warn that “there is no shortage of self-interested forces in the world that would prevent us from determining our own future or, alternatively, would invite us to voluntarily abdicate this responsibility. Colonialism, religious orthodoxy, authoritarian rule, and outright tyranny have all played their part in the past. Today, the ‘gentler’ force of consumerism and the erosion of morality which it fosters are equally capable of holding us back, under the pretence of making us more free.”

“Are we to move,” the letter continues, “towards an individualistic, fragmented society, wherein all feel liberated to pursue their own interests, even at the expense of the common good? Will we be tempted by the lures of materialism and its beholden agent, consumerism? Will we opt for a system that feeds on religious fanaticism? Are we prepared to allow an elite to emerge that will be oblivious to our collective aspirations, and may even seek to manipulate our desire for change? Or, will the process of change be allowed to lose momentum, dissolve into factional squabbling, and crumble under the weight of institutional inertia? It might justly be argued that, looking across the Arab region—and, indeed, beyond—the world wants for an unquestionably successful model of society worthy of emulation. Thus, if no existing model proves to be satisfactory, we might well consider charting a different course, and perhaps demonstrate to the community of nations that a new, truly progressive approach to the organization of society is possible.”

People in every part of the world are longing for such “a new, truly progressive approach to the organization of society.” Partisan democracy is not the answer. It’s time to move beyond the culture of contest.

The victims of these crimes against humanity include virtually every religious and ethnic minority in Iran, women’s rights advocates and social reformers, educators and journalists, activists and artists. The most aggrieved victims of these crimes may well be members of the Bahá’í Faith – whose systematic state-sponsored persecution has triggered international warnings regarding the early signs of a potential genocide.

These conditions in Iran have prompted non-violent actions and organizing efforts such as the Green Movement, United4Iran, and the One Million Signatures campaign. To date, however, the Iranian people have been unable to free themselves from the yoke of this tyrannical regime.  How, then, can the people of Iran realize their dreams of justice?

Perhaps a lesson can be drawn from the experience of the Danes under Nazi occupation. The Danes were remarkably resourceful in sheltering Jews from the genocidal campaign of the Nazis – resulting in one of the highest Jewish survival rates among any occupied country. As a result of their efforts, the following story emerged after World War II: When all Danish Jews were ordered to wear a yellow star, so they could be rounded up for the concentration camps, the non-Jewish Danes, led by their King, all donned the same yellow star in solidarity with the Jews, thus thwarting the genocide while protesting Nazi rule.

This story, it turns out, is not historically accurate. But it has circulated widely because it captures the spirit of Danish resistance to the inhumanity of the Nazis, even as it symbolizes a profound spiritual truth: The struggle for universal justice requires that relatively privileged majorities actively join in solidarity with the most oppressed among them.

Perhaps this spiritual truth will increasingly animate the struggle for justice in Iran. In this regard, consider what would happen if the majorities in Iran joined in solidarity with the most oppressed among them? What would happen if ordinary Iranians from all walks of life began to don symbols of solidarity with the Bahá’ís? What would happen if large numbers of Iranian students, when required to declare their religion on the university entrance forms that prevent Bahá’ís from attending university, wrote “Bahá’í” on their form? What would happen if a growing chorus of Iranians began to proclaim “we are all Bahá’ís!”

By expressing solidarity with the most oppressed among them, the people of Iran would undoubtedly emancipate not only the Bahá’ís, but also themselves. A regime that has clung to power by scapegoating Bahá’ís for all of the country’s ills could not long survive such a challenge to its ruling ideology.

If the struggle for universal justice requires privileged majorities to join in solidarity with the oppressed, then it is time to translate this spiritual truth into social reality in Iran. Doing so would establish the people of Iran as the standard-bearers of contemporary struggles for justice around the world. May the glory of such a distinction one day belong to Iran.