January 10th, 2017
(written by lawrence krubner, however indented passages are often quotes). You can contact lawrence at: firstname.lastname@example.org
All of the problems with gerrymandering can be solved by eliminating districts and holding all elections at the national level.
As a thought experiment, assume a society that is ruled by a legislature of 29 people. Each year, society votes and elects a single individual, who then serves for 29 years. One person elected per year for 29 years gives you a legislature of 29 people. If all local, city, and regional voting districts are abolished (the districts still exist, but these are appointed positions, not elected) the public, and the media, are able to focus their energy on choosing the one best person each year. All elected leaders face a strict term limit of one term.
Advantages of the system:
1.) leaders serve long enough that they can enact meaningful reform. They can also carry out necessary, but unpopular, policies, without facing immediate backlash from the people.
2.) There are no districts, therefore there is no gerrymandering.
3.) There are no decisive elections. Unlike Germany in 1933 or the USA in 2016, there are no elections in which it feels like the entire regime has changed all at once. All change is gradual, and it happens at the same pace every year.
4.) Society finally gets the true benefits of the rule of law, which is freedom from arbitrary changes. No government made of mortal flesh can ever be ensured to be wise, so hoping for wisdom is not realistic, but the rule of law can offer us stability and freedom from arbitrary government.
Some of these ideas go back to Plato. His Council Of Wisdom was to be made of those leaders who would serve forever. Considering how much the West seems to admire Plato, it is odd that no Western nation has ever attempted to implement anything like his ideas.Source