Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. Unfortunately, everyone is corruptible, it's just human nature. This is not a justification of what our political class does, but we should realize that the blame is not just with them, the blame also lies on us and on the current political system. The power we hand over to politicians is more power than what most people can resist.

In a different article I talk about how we could have a more fluid democracy. That article addresses how policies can be decided on, but governments do much more than that. If as a society we decide that every household should have internet access there are still many more decisions to be made before that policy can be materialized. What is the minimum bandwidth? What is the maximum cost? Must it be cabled? Or can it be delivered by satelite? If cabled, must the cables be buried? Where should the cables be placed? How much land are we willing to disturb? We started out enacting a very simple and straightforward policy, but its implementation is more nuanced. Many of these decisions can be then delegated back to the populace to vote on, but there has to be someone on the frontline that coordinates these efforts and comes back with more questions to be determined before carrying out the projects.

How do we create this position to be filled out by a corrupt person, without allowing that corruption to affect the outcome?

The idea of a cabinet of ministers and a prime minister makes sense. In a way it reflects how most companies work, there is a CEO and other C suites that advise the CEO. The difference with a company is that these people should have no power. They might have ideas on how the country should move forward and what could be improved, but all of these ideas have to be voted on by the people. No decision can be made by them, just recommendations.

Once a plan, for example providing internet to every household, has been fully fledged out, following the methodology presented earlier, a contract is drafted by the cabinet and approved by the populace and the contract is open to bidders. These bidders present their proposals which are then voted on by the populace and the winning proposal is approved. A very important step in this process is handling the payment. Money is power, and we can't let the cabinet hold any power, therefore they can't be the ones controlling the money. A countries' resources should belong to the people and one of the most important resources is money so the populace must control the countries' money. This money could be held in escrow by a central bank whose only purpose is to behave as an oracle and release funds once a proposal has been approved.

This group of people that hold the keys to the money could be said to hold some power completely defeating the purpose of this system. Again splitting the key, as explained in the voting system article, is a good option. On top of that given that removing power completely is impossible, we should strive to reduce it as much as possible while keeping it in check as much as possible. We have already mentioned some methods of reducing power so let's talk about how to keep it in check. The more power one has, the greater the punishment should be for misusing that power. Instead of granting protections to a prime minister that put them above the law, we should instead make them even more beholden to the law. Abusing their power to payout their friends when the country has no approved that spending should result in very harsh punishment, potentially even capital punishment. Strong deterrents do work and in extreme cases, such as giving someone the power to affect the lives of all the citizens of a country, extreme deterrents are justified.

On top of improving society, by making the government powerless we also remove incentives from private people and corporations to buy out government officials. The benefits of trying to corrupt a politician are less and therefore even while still having some power their chance of being corrupted goes down. But, not only that, positions of power attract people that want power. By making the position hold no power, we remove the self selection of power hungry people into positions that impact our lives. Instead we allow for more selfless people to rise to these positions where they can do good and influence many peoples' lives positively.