How to improve the democracy

  I am a supporter of democracy, but with one important caveat: I am not satisfied with the lack of efficiency in modern democracies of the West. Western countries now have too many problems, and local politicians, as a rule, do not even try to voice these problems.

   I would like more people to discuss this question - is it possible to improve modern democracy? The main goal is whether it is possible to build social and political institutions so that smart people often come to power in a democracy.

  I believe that it is quite a necessary step to introduce laws which help people with small experience in politics to come to power. Firstly, the state must support "technical ministers": people who have knowledge how to work as ministers, and not motivated too much to become politicians themselves. Probably a lot (random selection) can be good for this: suppose that the state finds 300 persons by lot, provides them money and lets them elect most smart people among them who can become such ministers.

  Another idea is that the participatory budgeting is needed: a system in which citizens of a country vote via the Internet on how to distribute the budget money. With such a system, ministers will be able to collect funding for their departments through the participatory budgeting portal, which means that they (ministers) will be less dependent on the president  / prime minister and more on the population. Accordingly, rarer will there be a situation when the president / prime minister will alienate a too outstanding minister from power as a possible competitor for himself.

  The next point is that with participatory budgeting, people and organizations that brought a smart person to power will be able to make money on this. Suppose a party is created that declares its goal to find and promote people with outstanding qualities who will become good leaders. Having made a certain person president, such a party will be able to collect its own reward through participatory budgeting: the more this president becomes popular, the more the party will earn. I.e.,  theoretically, under such a system, finding and promoting an outstanding person will become a kind of business for party members.

  If we assume that big money gives politicians the opportunity to come to power, then participatory budgeting can turn this to the benefit of society: a good politician will be able to make big money on popularity and real achievements (only with a time delay - first spend, and only then earn).

  The fundamental problem of democracy is that a president or prime minister is always interested in not supporting one of his ministers who is too smart, who might become more popular than the president and thus become his competitor. Accordingly, the president always tries to fire ministers who are too smart. To minimize this problem, it is necessary to make ministers less dependent on the president, and for this, again, participatory budgeting is needed. Another expression for the same idea is if some ministers are appointed not by the president or PM, but chosen via the Internet. For some areas, such as the army, this is inappropriate (war requires unity of command), but for many others it is quite suitable, especially for those that involve the dissemination of information.

The political system must provide people like celeibities or famous scientists the possibility to go into politics: firstly they will be able to initiate a voting in the internet via participatory bugdeting system, and the population will vote for providing these celebrities some state money for learning how to govern the country (if these celebrities are sufficiently popular and smart to win such voting). Then these celebrities will become more experienced in politics, and eventually they will be able to win the usual election. 

And one more point: the constitution should stipulate that all ministers must maintain personal blogs in order to share information, that will help new politicians rule the country if they come to power.