Fiscal Policy for a Global Economic Recovery.

Revised Proposal for a New Political System:

 "Accountabilism"

I watched a video recently that argued democracy, as a political system of governance, may be becoming obsolete. The presenter pointed out several reasons, emphasizing that the concept of democracy—specifically "one person, one vote"—fails to address a critical aspect of human behavior: the inherent desire for pleasure-seeking.

This notion resonated with me, and I’ve long believed that pure democracy is a myth. The very advocates of democracy often manipulate elections through various means—whether by hacking computer systems, spreading misinformation, slandering opposition, or using fear and financial incentives to sway voters. In reality, political parties are more focused on winning elections than on genuinely serving the people. If democracy is truly “for the people, by the people,” it has failed because the people often make decisions based not on truth or facts, but on coercion, manipulation, or self-interest.

Today, we see political factions forming globally, not around public interest, but around narrow, self-serving goals. Politicians often advocate for minority groups not out of a genuine desire for equality, but to protect their own personal beliefs or secure votes. They lie, cheat, and make promises they have no intention or ability to keep. This isn’t just an African problem—it's a global phenomenon. Some countries disguise these manipulations with intellectual discussions that help legitimize their actions in the public eye. Yet, despite the adoption of democracy worldwide, we’ve seen greater global challenges than ever before. Poverty, insecurity, and mental health issues are at alarming levels, while world hunger and climate change persist.

Democracy has failed to address these critical issues. Should we blame democracy itself or our collective human nature for our failures? The desire for pleasure and gain, which often drives us, can lead to self-destruction. What is good for one may be disastrous for all. Yet, each person makes decisions based on their own interests, without considering the interdependence of the global community. The actions of one country can deeply affect others, as we’ve seen with economic refugees from Africa and the spread of conflict across borders. The choices we make as individuals and nations affect everyone on this planet.

Given this, I began to imagine a new form of government—one that might address these failures and create a system that holds leaders accountable to the people. Below is a proposed framework for what I call "Accountabilism," a system focused on public good, transparency, and true democratic representation.

Proposed Framework for Accountabilism

1. No Political Parties

One of the central components of "Accountabilism" is the elimination of political parties. The reasoning behind this is to break free from the tribalism, partisanship, and factionalism that often undermine democratic systems. In a system without parties, individuals would have to run based on their qualifications, values, and specific plans for the nation. This eliminates the possibility of voters simply aligning with party ideologies without critically considering the individual merits of candidates. By running as independents, candidates are more likely to focus on the issues that matter to their constituents, rather than pandering to party platforms or being beholden to party loyalty.

Without political parties, there is greater room for diverse voices, and people can be free to vote based on a candidate’s values and how well they can represent their interests, rather than simply following partisan lines.

2. Public CV and Cover Letter

In order to ensure that only qualified individuals pursue political office, candidates must submit a detailed CV and cover letter to the public. The CV serves as a transparent record of their experience, achievements, and any relevant qualifications. The cover letter is a chance for aspirants to directly communicate their vision, values, and plan for governance. This open approach ensures that the public is fully informed about who is running and why they should be trusted with the role.

By requiring candidates to present themselves transparently, voters can evaluate candidates not just on their promises but also on their past achievements, character, and suitability for the position. This adds an element of personal responsibility that is often missing in conventional elections.

3. Transparent Personal History

In this system, candidates are required to disclose significant aspects of their personal lives—such as marriages, divorces, children, and any significant hardships they have faced. This level of transparency allows voters to better assess the candidate's character and ability to relate to the challenges ordinary people face.

Such disclosure would also serve as an opportunity for candidates to demonstrate resilience and the capacity to overcome adversity. This humanizes candidates and provides a clearer understanding of whether they can empathize with the struggles of the public.

4. Leadership Experience and Education

Candidates must show they have leadership experience or relevant education for the position they aspire to. This could come from prior work in leadership roles, volunteer experiences, or relevant training programs. If they lack formal leadership experience, candidates must demonstrate a clear plan for acquiring the necessary skills and qualifications before the election.

This ensures that only those who are genuinely capable of leading are elected to office. It also encourages personal development and continuous learning in governance, which could be a significant departure from the often stagnant political class.

5. Community-Level Engagement

For this system to work effectively, candidates must engage directly with the people they seek to represent. A public Q&A session at the community level would allow the electorate to question and understand the candidates' plans first-hand. This makes candidates more accountable and directly answers to the needs and concerns of the community.

This element also reinforces the idea that politicians are there to serve the people, not the other way around. It puts voters in the driver’s seat, helping them make informed choices by interacting with candidates on a personal level.

6. Presidential Qualification Requirements

To become president, candidates must have a history of service in lower offices, such as parliamentary roles or positions at the community level. This ensures that presidential candidates have proven experience in governance and understand the intricacies of working in public office before reaching the highest level.

This requirement prevents the rise of unqualified candidates who may lack the necessary governance skills, and it ensures that those vying for the presidency have a solid understanding of policy, legislation, and the needs of the people.

7. Nomination of Community Champions

In this model, the public has the opportunity to nominate individuals they believe would best serve them in the legislature. If a person is nominated by at least 70% of their community, they are required to run for office. This system fosters a closer relationship between voters and their representatives, ensuring that people have a real say in who represents them.

This also prevents candidates from being forced upon communities by political elites or party machinery, which often results in a disconnect between the government and the people it serves.

8. Public Debate

Public debates between presidential candidates serve as a crucial forum for the electorate to hear from the candidates directly. In these debates, candidates must defend their positions, answer difficult questions from the public, and explain how they intend to solve pressing issues such as poverty, climate change, and inequality.

This open platform encourages transparency and holds candidates accountable for their promises, allowing the public to gauge their leadership abilities and sincerity.

9. Limited Terms in Office

In a bid to prevent the entrenchment of political elites, no individual would be allowed to serve in any leadership position for more than 15 years. This rule forces a regular influx of new ideas and leadership, helping to avoid stagnation and corruption that can often come with long political tenures.

This ensures that no politician can stay in power indefinitely, thereby reducing the risk of self-serving career politicians who prioritize their own interests over the public good.

10. Community-Centred Voting

In this system, every representative would be held accountable by their community every five years. If they have not demonstrated tangible results in improving the lives of their constituents, they can be voted out of office and replaced by someone else.

This cycle encourages politicians to remain focused on serving their communities and producing measurable results, rather than using their positions for personal gain or to maintain power.

11. Mid-Term Reviews

To maintain ongoing accountability, a mid-term satisfaction survey will be conducted for each representative. This survey will provide voters with an opportunity to express their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their representative’s performance. If voters are unhappy with their representative’s actions, they can voice their concerns and push for change.

This ensures that representatives cannot become complacent during their term and must continually prove their worth to their constituents.

12. Bi-Annual Community Accountability Sessions

Every two years, representatives must hold a meeting with their community to present a report on their work and the progress made. This open communication is vital for ensuring that politicians remain connected to the people they serve and allows citizens to hold them accountable for their actions.

13. Balanced Opposition in Parliament

In the absence of political parties, a lottery-based system will be used to select opposition members in parliament. This ensures that both pro-government and anti-government voices are represented, leading to a more balanced and constructive debate.

This system also helps avoid the dominance of a single political faction, promoting diversity of thought and greater accountability.

14. Accountability for Ministers and Appointed Officials

Presidential candidates must publicly submit a list of proposed ministers and other high-ranking officials before elections. These individuals must undergo the same scrutiny as other candidates to ensure they are qualified for their positions.

Once in office, ministers and appointed officials are subject to regular reviews and, if necessary, public tribunals to evaluate their performance. If they are found to be underperforming, the public has the right to remove them.

15. Public Tribunal for Under-Performance

If ministers or other appointed officials are found to be underperforming, they will face a public tribunal where they must justify their actions. This ensures that public servants are held accountable for their decisions and actions, regardless of their position or political influence.

16. Impact on Re-election

The president’s record will be closely scrutinized based on the performance of their appointments. If they choose underperforming officials, it reflects poorly on their leadership abilities and may impact their re-election chances.

This system promotes accountability at all levels of government and ensures that leaders make wise, responsible appointments.

17. Ongoing Scrutiny for All Government Officials

This process of accountability and performance reviews will extend to all government officials, from the highest ministers to junior staff. Every individual in public office must demonstrate their value to the public and be held accountable for their actions.

18. Clear Definition of Public Good

A fundamental part of this system is the creation of a well-documented definition of the "public good" that guides every government action. This would be a collective agreement on what constitutes the well-being of society, and all policies would need to align with this definition.

By focusing on the public good, this system prioritizes the needs of the community and ensures that all political actions are designed to serve the greater good, rather than individual or corporate interests.

---

In conclusion, Accountabilism seeks to address the inherent flaws in our current political systems by placing an emphasis on transparency, integrity, and a commitment to serving the public good. By fostering a system where individuals are continuously held accountable for their actions and by breaking away from the traditional party-based political structures, this system seeks to create a more equitable, transparent, and responsive government. It may seem idealistic, but it’s a step toward a more accountable and sustainable future for all.