JessiWan on Nostr: Things I would do if I ever came into power: 1. Take money out of politics. As it ...

Things I would do if I ever came into power:

1. Take money out of politics. As it stands now, elections are expensive, and campaigns require a lot of money to finance. Especially presidential campaigns. So what results is that candidates need to find wealthy donors to back them. What this means is that rich people control our political system. Presidents, once they get elected, are beholden to the donors and will pass laws that the donors want. I am sure we are all familiar with this phenomenon. So, to fight this, I propose that we have candidates write down their platforms, their campaign promises, anything that they say to persuade the readers to vote for them, and compile a book out of it. Then this book is freely distributed both online and in paper-form in real life, so that anybody can access these writings very easily. This requires very little money (websites and paper are cheap). Then, we move to ban TVs, newspapers, radio, any other form of media, from mentioning any candidate at all. I want to do this because if we don't, then candidates that have wealthy backers will be able to buy TV time and spaces in newspapers to promote themselves. This gives them an edge over the other candidates who can't afford these things. So the end result is still big money influencing the outcomes of elections. Another bonus with having candidates write their stuff is we get to weed out the dummies. We expect our political leaders to be able to write. And to prevent them from simply hiring some hack to ghost-write for them, we lay out extremely harsh punishments for the candidates and writers who conspire to deceive the public like that.

2. Currently, there is absolutely zero recourse for the public if their president did not fulfill his campaign promises, or otherwise did a poor job as a president. I propose that we have this system whereby, once a president is retired from office, there be an account with all the banks in the country. We ask people whether they think the ex-president did a terrible job or not. If they think yes, they put 300 dollars in this account. If half the population do this, the ex-president goes to jail for an certain period of time. If 60% of people do this, he goes to jail even longer. And the rate at which his jail sentence lengthens goes up exponentially. And if 90% of the people are unhappy with him, he goes to jail for life. My reasoning is that with any president, there will always be some people who are dissatisfied with him. So I set the threshold at half of the population. However, if over 90% of people want to vote him into jail, then this is a very clear sign that he truly did do a terrible job, and an extremely harsh sentence is justified. The 300 dollars is set at such a level that it requires a not insignificant amount of money, so that people won't put an ex-president in jail lightly. But it's low enough that most people can still realistically afford it.

I want to do this because I remember talking to someone online. He was extremely unhappy with a certain law that a lawmaker in his state passed. He said he wanted said lawmaker to think, "if I pass this law, will I make it home alive tonight?" Apparently he was so unhappy that he was willing to commit acts of violence. Even though I share his anger, nevertheless I don't believe that violence is the solution to bad politicians. It's not realistic to expect people to take up arms and violently punish bad political leaders. There needs to be a way, a legal, non-bloody way for people to punish politicians for doing a poor job. Currently, there are zero consequences that politicians have to face for not carrying out the will of the people, so they do whatever they like. They know that they won't be punished in any way. The people know this is wrong, and they get angry. But this doesn't achieve anything. I want people's anger to mean something. Stewing in anger, complaining to other people, writing angry letters, making anger phone calls are currently all that we can do, and trust me these things don't mean anything to a bad politician. This has to change.



3. Conversely, if a president did a good job, he should be rewarded. I propose that there be an account with all the banks in the country that's called the ex-president's account. Anybody can put money into this account. If they think an ex-president truly did a good job, they can put in any amount of money to show their appreciation for him and to reward him for a job well done. Currently, not only are there no consequences for being a poor president, there are also no rewards for being a good one, either. This is very bad and creates a situation where presidents are pretty much guaranteed to be shitty. However, they now know that not only will they go to jail for doing a poor job, they will also be given lots of money for doing a good job. This creates an incentive for them to carry out the will of the people and to do things that benefit the masses. I mean, right now, what do we do for good ex-presidents? We might write books about them, praise them in newspapers, maybe sing songs about them, all of these things, though nice, do not benefit them in any tangible, real way. And this makes it very tempting for them to sell out the people and to cozy up to rich donors, who can and do benefit them tangibly by giving them money. I want to change this.

4. Lastly, I want to create something called The Shaming. Basically it lists the names of the closest blood relatives of a president. If a president fell from grace, not only will he be punished, it will also bring shame to his family, especially his children and other close relatives. This is yet another way to prevent supreme leaders of the land from engaging in behaviors that harm the nation but benefit themselves. The motivation for corruption, bribe-taking and similar behaviors is usually to benefit their children financially. They desire to see their children thrive. I want to use this to our advantage. I want them to know that their unethical behaviors will not pay. If their offspring is associated in the public mind with someone who is on the take, then it doesn't matter how much money they leave him, he will be in a state of shame, and people will shun him. They will not want to associate with him in any way. They will also want to avoid marrying him. I believe this should serve as a very strong deterrent against improper presidential behaviors. It's a weapon we have against corruption at the highest level. It's something our ancestors had done for thousands of years to police one another's behavior. If you do something shameful, you will bring shame on your family. Then your bloodline gets disgraced. It's powerful stuff. Some might think this would be an intrusion on the privacy of the politician's family members. I say, not so. What will happen is the candidate my party puts forth will voluntarily disclose this info. His family gives him permission, because they don't fear that he will do anything to bring them shame. The public sees this, and thinks, "This person has nothing to hide, and his family have complete faith in him. He is the person I want to vote for!" And then, other candidates will have no choice but to follow suit, because they will lose to us if they don't. This way, nobody is forced to do anything, nobody's privacy is trampled on, and my vision is brought to reality. It's pure genius.