The voter as the weakest link in the system

There is only one golden rule in representative democracy - those in power must be changed, changed, changed.

If the voter does not understand that in 4 years they will have to elect Miki instead of Pille, and Marusja instead of Miki, and Tõelemb instead of Marusja, then they will continue to struggle like a fish out of water and whine in the midst of growing troubles, having caused this stagnation and created a nomenclature elite by not following the principles of representative democracy.

All local politics and media are sickly person-centered, Stalinist, with traces of a personality cult — but the democratic system operates according to principles and their application. Representative democracy is inherently based on mechanics, not on the moral testing of old men at the ballot box, the incomprehensible Jesus hunt, or the futile search for a superman.

A representative may not have any visible flaws or faults, but representative democracy works in such a way that, as a preventive measure, representatives must be replaced — to clear the way, give others a chance, and allow new ideas and people into power so that some changes can occur in the state's bureaucracy and executive bodies.

From the moment a member of parliament signs a pledge to serve the Republic of Estonia faithfully, he or she begins to become corrupt — even if he or she doesn’t buy a single can of mayonnaise or spend 640 million to breed a medieval machine-shredder’s delicacy somewhere in the East. This is the internal logic of every system: the participant in the system is tied down in such a way that his or her decisions are no longer independent, the bias may also be unconscious, and after 4 years, he or she is no longer free or innovative in his or her decisions. All management theories claim that after 5 years, every leader’s innovative spirit is exhausted and he or she must pass on his or her place to the next candidate.

A representative of the people has been in government for 4 years and leaves, has been in power for 5 years and leaves — can it be anything simpler? Follow one rule and you can't do it: keep the same corrupt clique in power for 20 years and then wonder why it's so bad. One person and one term of government, one person and one time representing the interests of the people — clear rules and a certain order would prevent so many personal tragedies, virile departures and abuses of power. Knowing about returning to everyday life would discipline every politician even without the moral police.

A participatory and direct democratic structure would be a step forward, based on everyone's personal daily contribution, but this must be developed before the Constitution can be amended in the spirit of direct and participatory democracy.

Voters have failed to understand in 25 years that democratic governance means regularly changing people in leadership positions and keeping society moving. Changing representatives and leaders is a tool of democracy that regularly cleans state offices, preventing dictators, executioners and troikas and preventing their emergence. By changing the top, changes also begin to occur in the substructures.

Changes in society must be made when the needs for change are not yet apparent.

If we had understood what a parliamentary republic means and how it works, we wouldn't have a bunch of half-witted old men for the last 20 years — nor would we have this fake media, corruption, and the destruction of the country. If we understood how and through what mechanics democracy works, this Politburo game with its special buffet would end.

In politics, 100 days are given to new forces precisely for change , because the rest of the time is just spent sitting around idly anyway — but it would be good if at least the first 100 days were spent implementing innovations.

Ege Deer