Mainstream transition theory predicts productive conflict between a declining old pattern and an emerging new pattern. It does not challenge the liberal democratic paradigm, other than proposing improved citizen participation. Task democracy proposes a more radical upgrade of liberal democracy that may reduce transition conflict, by installing negotiation platforms for task groups.
Mainstream transition theory emphasises conflict between upcoming niche solutions for societal problems and declining patterns defended by regime players (e.g, Rotmans, 2021). Over time, the innovation wins and can be consolidated. An example of the application of this theory is the climate case in which Urgenda successfully urged a court ruling that forces the state to do more to combat climate change.
Paul Frissen sees historicism in this transition thinking, a doctrine of historical necessity. According to him, this leaves no room for other views: 'They are a vanguard that knows the future, points the way to it and does not shy away from coercion, in the form of action and court rulings. They want a new beginning, after which the circle is closed' (Frissen, 2023).
Task democracy, like transition thinking, starts from scientifically proven sustainability crises, but also takes the plurality of society as a starting point. Task democracy then offers a method of political decision-making for social task division in society wide transition campaigns. This decision-making leaves room for all views and for deliberation. The outcome is not fixed but is constantly redetermined. The right to vote is not distributed equally among all citizens, but among five task groups that need each other and in which citizens are represented in different ways.