Democracy?

[Karloman]

CEOs aren't elected unless the Board decides to hold a vote, and even then it is based on poor performance i.e. the CEO of Disney stood for decades, and Steve Jobs led Apple till his untimely death. We have no reason to push for an unknown, when we've had great Delegates so far, as our method is to allow the Assembly to vote out the Delegate vs holding elections on a security position.

Whenever the debate was brought up, it came down to it being better having a secure Delegacy. It would also undermine the point of a PM/Managing Director under the current mandate, as then you'd have two political positions competing for power, which helped to cause a civil war during the CU regime.

I understand that CEO's are not frequently elected, but I used that as an example because I think the deeper and stronger principle is responsiveness to constituents with frequent checks in the form of elections. Obviously I have done some reading into the history as far as what you mentioned goes, but I may need some more clarification on what exactly happened that caused that situation of dual executives to go so sour.

Also, even if we do keep the status quo when it comes to the selection of the Delegate, perhaps it would be prudent to have the election of some of the other positions, like say ministers or the speaker role. Thanks again for all your responses. I love the discussion going on here. It is very informative and helpful!