Hacker News Reader

Comment by EdwardDiego | Hacker News Reader

Or, reform your Presidency to be a constitutional role only, with executive power devolved to the party or parties of your elected representatives that is able to show the head of state that they have the numbers to govern.

E.g. like the President of Ireland, or the King of England (via the Governor General proxy) in countries like Canada, Australia, New Zealand.

Also, the Electoral College is an archaic anachronism, and may I recommend a system of proportional representation?

Devolution to "states rights" is exactly that, a devolution.

View on HN

What works for a country the size of a New York neighbourhood doesn't work for a country the size of a continent.

Britain ran a global empire using this model, why wouldn't it work for the US?

Maybe read up on how it works before rejecting it out of hand?

Britain has a bicameral parliament, with the leader of the majority of the lower house forming the executive, but the head of state retains the constitutional ability to dissolve parliament and order new elections if the current government is unable to function.

Having an apolitical head of state might be worth looking into.

Britain had two parliaments in the home island - Scotlands and Englands.

The only people who can possibly think the British empire was centralised are those who have never opened a history book about it.

Oh mate, I am feeling Fremdschämen / vicarious embarrassment for you very hard right now.

You obviously haven't opened a history book either, but at the very least, go to Wikipedia before making confident statements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliament

Subtle hint - 1707 to 1999.

> Britain ran a global empire using this model, why wouldn't it work for the US?

The “global empire” was systematically disenfranchised under that model, which is a big reason why it broke up, and that was specifically called out by the US when it left.

I mean, there are arguably good examples of parliamentary democracy working at significant scale in a state, but the UK’s government at home while the empire was managed through a bunch of other systems is very much not one of them.

That’s odd, unlike the USA, Australia is in fact a country the size of a continent…

> What works for a country the size of a New York neighbourhood doesn't work for a country the size of a continent.

While I personally think the problem with the US system is much more in lack of proportionality in the electoral system used for the legislature , but, even so, I can recognize thet parliamentary government doesn't only work at small scales.

Which country are you referring to?

Presumably Ireland. Because it doesn't fit Canada, Australia, or New Zealand.

Wait, it doesn't even fit Ireland.

Unless they were talking about population? Then maybe NZ would fit. Is there a New York neighbourhood with 5 million people?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com