We have been talking Revolution over at David's blog and I'm always up for a bit of usurping but who to usurp and what system of Government will be imposed instead? Rather than a large scale revolution with tanks on the streets and guillotines, i propose a bastardised version of what we have now and laughably call Democracy.
The debate over the $700b to the financial markets is as good as an example as there will ever be of what's wrong with the system we have. We elect a person to represent us and they go off to do our business, or at least that's the idea.
What actually happens is they do what they want until approximately six months before they are up for nomination again and then they pay attention, don't want to upset the plebs that put him in that privileged position.
The House of Representatives that initially turned down the billion dollar hand-out
did it apparently because they had been receiving communications from their electorate telling them that they were against the idea. Very thoughtful although they wouldn't have given a second thought to their electorate a year ago.
And there is the nub of my revolution, to keep the people who we elect to do what's best for us in that perpetual state of having to do our bidding in order to stay in power. The simple answer is referendums and plenty of them coupled with a maximum of two years between elections.
We have a situation in the US and in the UK with two leaders with the lowest ratings in our lifetimes, a simple system where ratings below 35% would trigger an election would keep our leaders mind focused.
So there we have my back-of-a-cigarette-packet idea for a system of Government. Two year terms, referendums on the big decisions and a mechanism to remove unpopular leaders to stop them clinging to power at the detriment of the country they are charged with representing.
All i need now is to get elected so i can implement it.