Switzerland has its referendum model. That's the closest approximation I can think of.

One of the biggest mistakes in relation to technology is how Dennis Ritchie implemented pointers in C. The problem is both with null, and using pointers as both pointers to individual elements and to arrays. Has added millions of hours to frustration and debug time for programmers across the world.

Until a better system evolves we work with what we have, within the parameters set by those we allow to set them, who's main interest is solidifying their grasp.
Humanity could do a lot of things.
It deserves wherever it lets itself be led.

.In Belgium they had no majority for 2 years or more. This meant that no new laws were passed because they had govt. Any redundant legislation was taken out by the judiciary. The economy flourished.

We have an Electricity pricing hearing in our State Legislature at the moment. My power company is having their say at the moment. It is so hard to change the status quo.
[parliament.nsw.gov.au]

human life is huge cancerous machine that will plough on till it self-destructs and that is that.

Personally, I think we should just print more money and offer to pay people who know what they're doing to figure everything out.

Sounds pretty much the same in the USA as it does there in Australia.
Realistically, here in the USA, I think the main problem are the two dominant political parties we have. It's my suspicion they actually plot with each other to stay dominant and keep any other political parties from being a real threat. As far as I can see, both parties act to the benefit of corporations and the wealthy, to the detriment of the people.

If the political party situation is similar in Australia, then maybe you'll understand what I'm getting at.

Sure, not everyone gets a vote.

In the US you either test to become a citizen or are born here and with either, need to avoid a conviction. This is not an adequate gate for who gets a say in choosing our leadership. It's a popularity contest more than a job interview.

If you really want a better form of leadership, you need a better selection process that weeds out people with weak character or poor values. You cannot do that when you rely on the entirety of the populace to choose which is susceptible to anyone in a suit. If no successful businesses select their CEO by democratic vote of their entire staff, why would you the government?

The founding fathers set the table for the concept although they didn't understand that land ownership, race, and sex, do not equate to character and intelligence. In today's day and age, you could create a process whereas you need to earn the right to vote through hard work, schooling, and testing. We don't do that so the results speak for themselves.

Revolution my friend

It's not the system that's wrong, it is the people who have taken control. Any system can be gamed, and sooner or later all systems will be gamed. We the People need to take control again, and it will be a long difficult war, yes war. The conservatives are fearful of many things, including take over by foreign influences. Some of them have little empathy and will kill to assure they feel safe. On the other hand, we can run a non-violent campaign, as Ghandi and Martin L. King did, and we can win. Unfortunately, we may have casualties.

interesting on actually voting on everything vs calling or writing and hope they take your view into consideration