Is There An Alternative to the Western Political Model?

I am a strong advocate of free but responsible, informed speech. I don't believe in jailing someone for their political thoughts, unless he advocates violence or hatred. I strongly believe in a free but responsible press, and a free election.

However, the last 10 years I have seen how western democracy has degenerated into a farce. In the US, Obama tried to reform healthcare and cut taxes for the middle-class. All the Republicans want is to make sure Obama doesn't get a second term. They are not interested in making America strong. Republicans are backed by strong corporate lobbyists, by the National Rifle Association, the Religious Right, the arms industry. They propogate half-truths about what Obama is trying to do. The Republicans are also anti-environmental protection. The Kyoto Protocol will never be ratified as long as the Republicans have a say. It's incredible that half of America forget that it was under Bush junior that their fiscal surplus was turned into a massive deficit. Under Bush, they fought a unjust war in Iraq looking for weapons of mass destruction without fruit. If a Republican president gains power in 2012, it will be the Democrats' to turn on the power incumbent. The Republicans had great president. Ronald Reagan brought rampant spending under control in the 80s after a series of ineffective and spendthrift Democratic presidents. But since the 90s, the Democrats have shifted to the centre. If the Americans choose Republicans, they choose war, global warming and the demise of all.

In Europe, decades of democratic rule, socialist/communist parties have come into power. In many European countries, dangerous anti-immigrant right-wing parties have come into power. Many of these parties have nothing but promises of free education, high taxes, high unemployment benefits, free healthcare. But there's no free lunch. The Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Spain and Belgium are finally admitting fiscal deficits larger than their GDP can handle.

The result of one-man-one-vote is a sprial towards petty politics with parties only interested in immediate results without a care for long-term implications.

I don't have an answer to this. Perhaps the answer lies in giving the person who pays more taxes slightly more votes. If person A pays S$50k per annum in taxes, he should have twice the number of votes as a person who pays only S$5k. This is not a perfect system. There are many important interests that may not be met by such a system. For example, how will environmental protection be looked after by such a system? After all, the one who pays the most taxes may not more interested in protecting the environment than say a fresh graduate who pays little taxes. It's open for discussion.