For your recollection: we are trying to learn from weaknesses of the European especially the German democracy, to get thr organizational set-up of our terraistic organization right. At the moment we are looking at the role of the president:
Does the president get what he deserves?
Our terraistic president may earn well. It is not understandable why some board members of big cooperations earn fifty times more than the German Chancellor. In my personal opinion such salaries should be banned generally – but that is not up for debate here. We should get into an area that attracts talent – but not money-hungry self-promoters. In return, and to prevent abuse, I think it would be appropriate to demand full financial transparency from such a person. In Finland, for example, every income declaration is published on the Internet. At least for individuals with a porofessional career in the association that such trasnparency should be standard to prevent corruption and grudge.
Do only superrich have a chance for presidency anyways?
Would only rich people have the means to run for president? In times of the Internet money is still an advantage, but no longer a pre-requisite to finance a campaign. People with persuasive power and good ideas will reach enough supporters to act efficiently in social networks. In addition, a digital platform for qualified applicants should be provided by the association (more on this later).
How long is long enough?
A further improvement, at least at the planetary level, would be to extend the term of office / election period significantly. Currently, after coalition formation and familiarization, there are often only two years left before the next election campaign begins. However, successes and failures for which a government is responsible take several years to become visible. Eight to ten years could be a reasonable time period hat also gives one the chance to learn from mistakes and profit from own successes. In order to limit coterie and powerplays, and in order to allow for new perspectives on the planetary challenges, there should be only one term of office and no re-election possible.
What if one cannot get enough?
The before mentioned restrictions should be anchored in the statutes with at least a two-thirds majority necessary to effect change. To influence the members around the panet and especially companies, associations, states and associations of states in an improper manner is likely to be a difficult undertaking in a multilingual global setting. The classic path to despotism via a constitutional amendment approved by parliament is thus at least very unlikely. In addition, the general meeting of the association has the possibility to remove the executive committee including the president from office every year. Without armed forces there is no way to resist. This control mechanism alone seems to me to be suitable to raise the comfort level to a reasonable level during longer terms of office.
Next week we start looking at the “council of elders”. An organ that exerts control but should also build trust and continuity as well as advise every other organ of the association. The conscience of the association.