1 The Augmented D emocracy Dawn of the Political Startup Nation By Fr ede ric Aknin 2 Introduction We are experiencing a profound political and institutional fracture. A parliamentary majority, secure in its power, is concentrating the levers of the State, marginalizing checks and balances, and imposing a unilateral vision of the future. Parliament has been transformed into a rubber - stamp chamber ; ministries serve partisan logics; budgets become the instrument of drastic sectoral redistribution. The quality of legislative debate has plummeted. Texts are botched or blocked. The most extreme elected repres entatives take all the limelight . And all the while, the population is riven by its own political divisions, skillfully exacerbated while continuing to act pragmatically and responsibly - often against the grain of a system that inflames divisions rather than calms them. The problem is structural. It's not just about the people, but about the very architecture of the regime . Because a political system is not neutral: it shapes the way a country looks at its own people. Today, citizens are expected to define themselves by their camp, to defend their group, to fight against others to ensure that their interests or value system prevail . Politics exploits tribal reflexes, on fear, on identity segmentation. And this approach, in turn, creates what it anticipates: a distrustful, bitter society, ready for rupture. Viktor Frankl used to say that we should look at man not as he is, but as he could be. Exactly the opposite is the case here: the people are pushed back to their tribe, viewed through the prism of their withdrawal, their fears, their flaws - and a system is fashioned to amplify them. The current crisis is more than an imbalance. It's a symptom. The symptom of a political system incapable of sensing, adapting to and correcting its own errors. A frozen system, inherited from another century, conceived in the urgency of founding the State, copied from foreign parli amentary models, designed to manage the present of a nation to be recreated, not to project a vision. For 75 years, various aspects of this regime have polarized criticism. But the last seven years have seen an unprecedented wave of delegitimization of the founding institutions - courts, army, police, internal security - accused by the government itself of obstructing its will , i.e. the " sovereign will" of the people as expressed at the ballot box . This logic has fractured confidence in the State. It has damaged the bond between citizens, eroded their civic loyalty, and plunged the country into a form of existential suspicion The current political system draws the worst out of us. It's time to create a system that extracts the best. What if this crisis wasn't a collapse , but a radical opportunity? What if the pain we're all feeling - shame, rage, a sense of oppression - is the signal that it's time to dare to do something different? To stop thinking only in terms of politicians to be replaced, but of a political structure to be reinvented? To no longer fight for a temporary providential majority, but for a democratic software capable of resilience, fairness and greatness? The opportunity is there, precisely because Israel is not a country like the others. It is an extraordinarily vibrant civil society. It reacts quickly, thinks hard and always picks itself up. It has a fertile collective intelligence , made up of dissonant but fertile points of view, and a rare ability to create in a crisis. Patriotism is concrete, active, often sacrificial and profoundly united, as demonstrated by the attitude of the Israelis in the aftermath of October 7th. This country is home to a parado xical genius: fertile individualism and a sense of belonging to a people and a history . We have no shortage of talent, no shortage of drive. What we lack are 3 the structures capable of capturing, amplifying and channelling this civic energy. What we lack is a porous democracy - open to citizen action, social innovation and genuine participation. This manifesto proposes just that: an augmented democracy . An organic, evolving democracy that embraces technological innovation, civic ethics, active listening, long - term planning, legislative co - creation and collective introspection. A democracy that enables everyone to participate - truly - in the construction of the common good . A democracy where politics is no longer a profession or a stage sho w , but a service, a quest, a collective work. A democracy that does not seek to crown a providential man, but to unleash the energy of providence among its citizens. Israel is a people returned from among the nations. A people who, against all odds, revived a dead language, rebuilt a barren land, transformed pain into strength. We carry within us a prophetic memory, an unfinished mission. Perhaps this is our opportunit y today: to show that a people capable of rebirth is also capable of inventing the future. Not an imposed, ideological, vertical future. But a future designed together, in a spirit of listening, complexity and greatness. It's not just an option: it's our d uty. This short essay does not seek to impose a model, but to propose a matrix. It does not deliver a closed plan, but a space to co - create. Each chapter develops a structuring proposal, a brick in a larger edifice: a society capable of debating without destroy ing itself, of reforming without betraying itself, of dreaming without blinding itself. This manifesto, a short and readable version of a larger project, is not intended to go into all the technical or institutional details. It is the map, not yet the buil ding. It is essentially a call. To think, to discuss, to challenge, to complete. But above all, to build. Together. At last. How to read this manifesto This manifesto is not a closed solution, nor a technocratic program. It is an invitation: to think differently, to question the obvious, to imagine new power structures that truly serve society. It's a foundation text, deliberately concise, designed to ask the right questions , those that awaken thought, nourish the political imagination, and sketch out the contours of a democracy to be reinvented. The proposals presented here are not dogmas. They are prototypical responses to vital issues, identified through observation, experience and analysis. Some are developed, while others are deliberately sketched out so as not to weigh down the discussion. Ea ch can be explored in greater depth through appendices, online explanation modules, podcasts or open debate. Readers are invited to become co - designers That's why each chapter is preceded by a box of key questions . These questions are not rhetorical. They are intended to activate the reading experience, to transform the reader into an actor: stimulating lucidity, challenging the critical sense, sparking new ideas. These questions are the beating heart of the manifesto. They can be read before each chapter , as a mental preparation, or afterwards , as a resonance tool. They open up avenues. They call for discussion, exploration and invention. Because rebuilding a democracy means first and foremost regaining the freedom to ask ambitious questions 4 Table of contents Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 2 Why do we call it an "Augmented Democracy"? ................................ ............................... 8 The technological elevation of politics ................................ ................................ ........................ 8 Augmented, ethical and distributed representation ................................ .............................. 8 CHAPTER 1: RESTORING TRUST - CHANGING THE RULES OF THE GAME ................... 9 1. Deep crisis of legitimacy and loss of confidence ................................ ................................ .. 9 2. Rigorous new selection criteria for elected representatives ................................ ...... 10 a) The principle of open primaries ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 10 b) A direct, weighted selection mechanism focused on the common good ................................ ...... 10 3. Behavior and responsibility of elected representatives ................................ ............... 12 4. Restoring the value of election promises ................................ ................................ ............ 13 5. Rigorous anti - corruption mechanisms ................................ ................................ ................ 14 CHAPTER 2: THE CIVIC PARLIAMENT - A COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE AT THE SERVICE OF THE NATION ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 16 1. A representative democracy running out of steam ................................ ......................... 16 2. A shadow government based on collective intelligence ................................ ................ 17 3. A hybrid composition, both rooted and competent ................................ ........................ 18 4. A clear mission: enhancing legislative quality ................................ ................................ .. 18 5. A democracy that listens, tests and invents ................................ ................................ ....... 19 6. Simple, effective and transformative institutional leverage ................................ ....... 19 CHAPTER 3: THE CIVIC RESERVE - THE CITIZEN AS A DIRECT AGENT OF SOCIAL CHANGE ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 20 Introduction: Citizen energy as a force for transformation ................................ .............. 20 1. Citizens' assemblies: building fruitful disagreements and a common language .. 21 2. The participative civic reserve: mobilizing the country's intelligence as if we were mobilizing an army ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 21 3. Citizen Impact Tenders: Scaling What Works ................................ ................................ .... 21 Conclusion: A democratic performance architecture ................................ ......................... 22 CHAPTER 4: THE AUGMENTED PARTICIPATIVE PLATFORM - HARNESSING COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE THROUGH NEW TECHNOLOGIES ................................ ... 23 A democratic dashboard to guide, measure and connect ................................ .................. 24 1. Measure needs, detect consensus, prioritize reality ................................ ....................... 24 2. Participate, influence, make laws evolve in real time ................................ .................... 24 3. Mapping fractures, alerting institutions, triggering mediation ................................ .. 25 5 4. Distinguish between powerful ideas, not people - and create an open talent ecosystem ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 26 5. Identify talent, activate participation, irrigate institutions ................................ ......... 26 6. A civic interface for shared democracy ................................ ................................ ................ 27 CHAPTER 5 - STRATEGIC PLANNING: THINKING AND BUILDING FOR THE LONG TERM ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 27 1. Why democracy needs planning ................................ ................................ ............................. 28 2. The Strategic Planning Council (SPC): a key player in the long term ....................... 28 3. The influence of government and the people ................................ ................................ .... 29 4. A long - term political culture ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 29 CHAPTER 6 - RESTORING PUBLIC DEBATE - FOR A TRUE, ETHICAL AND RESPONSIBLE POLITICAL VOICE ................................ ................................ ......................... 29 1. The alarming reality of a degraded and manipulated public debate ....................... 30 2. Setting up an Israeli Media Regulatory Authority to rigorously regulate public debate ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 30 3. Decisive strengthening of independent investigative journalism ............................. 32 4. Citizen AI as a revolutionary tool for analyzing political speech ............................... 32 CHAPTER 7: AUGMENTED FINANCING - PUTTING PUBLIC MONEY TO WORK FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE, INNOVATION AND THE COMMON GOOD ................................ ........... 33 1 . What the budget sees, what it doesn't yet see ................................ ................................ ... 36 2 . Spend better: experiment, test, correct ................................ ................................ ............... 38 3 . The explosion of resources: trillions for the common good ................................ ........ 39 4 . The Augmented B udget in A ction ................................ ................................ ........................... 41 5 . Budget statement for the nations of the 21st century ................................ .................... 44 CHAPTER 8 - SELF - IMPROVING GOVERNANCE: MEASUREMENT FOR BETTER DECISION - MAKING ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 45 1. Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 46 a) The three vital dimensions of democratic evaluation ................................ ................................ ................. 46 b) Tools for self - improving governance ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 47 c) An evolving democracy, true to its core mission ................................ ................................ ............................ 47 2. Ensure the conditions for free, fair and informed democratic debate ..................... 47 3. Guaranteeing the real quality of the laws produced and effective co - creation by citizens ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 48 4. Consolidate democratic legitimacy and continuously optimize augmented governance ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 50 CHAPTER 9: ISRAEL, PILOT NATION OF THE 21st CENTURY - EXPORTING A LIVING, HUMAN AND VISIONARY DEMOCRACY MODEL ................................ ................ 51 6 1. Show: Exporting policies that work ................................ ................................ ....................... 52 2 Absorption: Welcoming the world's brightest ideas ................................ ....................... 53 3. Dissemination: Sharing a living democratic grammar ................................ ................... 54 Conclusion - A nation that transforms experience into common good ........................ 54 CHAPTER 10 - WHERE TO START? ................................ ................................ ...................... 55 Don't wait for permission, act without a mandate ................................ ............................... 55 1. DEMOCRATECH: an full arsenal of tools for a democracy of truth ............................. 55 2. Parallel institutions: foreshadowing the future in action ................................ ............. 56 3. Igniting the civic spirit: reinventing popular mobilization ................................ .......... 57 CONCLUSION - A democracy that uplifts, or nothing at all ................................ ......... 58 Afterword - This manifesto is a doorway, not the final plan ................................ ..... 59 APPENDICES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 61 Appendix 0 - The short pitch ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 61 a) Very short version ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 61 b) Intermediate version ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 61 Appendix I - Indicators of an Augmented Democracy ................................ ......................... 63 Table of steering indicators for augmented democracy ................................ ................................ .................. 63 Appendix conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 63 Appendix II - Glossary of an Augmented Democracy ................................ ........................... 64 Enhanced democracy ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 64 Civic parliament ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 64 Civic reserve ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 64 Augmented participatory platform ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 64 Self - improving governance ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 64 Impact simulator ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 64 Open Source Politics / Gouvernement open source ................................ ................................ .......................... 64 Elected coherence index ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 64 Israeli ARCOM ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 65 Augmented budgetary justice ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 65 Pilot nation ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 65 Appendix III: International inspirations: reforms from elsewhere, lessons for here ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 66 1. Participatory budgeting (Porto Alegre, Paris, etc.) ................................ ................................ ........................ 66 2. Citizens' Climate Convention (France) ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 66 3. Digital democracy in Taiwan ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 66 4. Singapore Anti - Corruption Commission (CPIB) ................................ ................................ ............................. 66 5. New Zealand Policy Labs ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 66 6. Open Parliament in Chile and Uruguay ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 67 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 67 Appendix IV: The Strategic Planning Council ................................ ................................ ......... 68 1. Purpose and raison d'être ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 68 2. Composition ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 68 3. Operation ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 68 4. Operational tools ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 68 7 5. Institutional interactions ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 68 6. Transparency and accountability ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 69 7. Symbolic and cultural role ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 69 Appendix V - Table of available in - depth studies ................................ ................................ 70 Appendix VI: Indicators of an Augmented Democracy ................................ ....................... 71 Social indexes ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 71 Indicators for evaluating laws : ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 71 New indicator: the citizen misunderstanding indicator : ................................ ................................ ................ 71 8 Why do we call it an " A ugmented D emocracy"? The technological elevation of politics We're already talking about augmented reality, when a surgeon equipped with a helmet or interface sees his or her field of action enriched with critical information: invisible vessels, ideal trajectory, secondary risks. He becomes more precise, more ethica l, more efficient. Why shouldn't politics benefit from the same upgrade ? A clearer vision, a better understanding of systemic interactions, a greater ability to anticipate the consequences of every reform, every choice. Augmented Democracy integrates concrete, operational tools to serve this ambition: an AI dedicated to analyzing public discourse and verifying policy coherence; a participatory platform enabling all citizens to understand, simulate, propose and amend laws; a rating system for elected representatives based on public, objective criteria; a reform simulator that anticipates the impact of a law on global strategy, economic balance, social cohesion or national unity indicators. This technology does not replace judgment or deliberation: it enhances them. It enhances the citizen's ability to understand reality, the decision - maker's ability to anticipate systemic effects, and society's ability to evaluate itself over time. It thwart s fake news and manipulation and reveals invisible chains of causality. It re - establishes lucidity as the basis for public action. Augmented, ethical and distributed representation Augmentation is not limited to technology. It reaches into the very core of political representation. In today’s democracies, a candidate may be elected on the basis of a popular promise, only to abandon it once in office — compelled by the demands of a na rrow primary electorate, the constraints of a fragile coalition, or the influence of powerful lobbies. This disjunction between the mandate received and the power exercised reveals a fundamental flaw in representative systems: delegated authority often bec omes structurally misaligned with the broader public interest, shaped instead by internal incentives that diverge from the general will. Augmented democracy opens up this power. It redistributes it. It makes it transparent. Through a civic parliament made up of both party - appointed experts and exemplary citizens, it introduces a technical and moral elite into the law - making process. It makes possible a genuine counterproposal to each political project: a constructed alternative, debated and argued, not in sterile opposition but in the demand for a better solution. It also gives a voice to those who have never had one: the silent geniuses, the innovators without access to power, the grassroots thinkers, the visionary educators. Thanks to the open ideas platform and organized collective intelligence, every citizen can be a source of political innovation. Ethics and competence become levers for action, alongside partisan commitment. This democracy is thus enhanced in its relays: the elected representative is no longer alone; the citizen is no longer excluded; the expert does not remain in the shadows. It is a representative, participatory and distributed democracy, capable of combining responsibility and inclusion. It does not abolish disagreements: it illu minates them, structures them, transcends them. 9 This is the profound meaning of "augmentation": not just another technology, but a newfound collective power, ethical, transparent and resolutely human. CHAPTER 1 : RESTORING TRUST - CHANGING THE RULES OF THE GAME Key Questions - Chapter 1: Restoring trust - What if elections finally allowed us to choose the best, rather than the most visible, the most divisive or the most strategic? - How can we design a candidate selection process that discourages manipulative profiles and favors stable, loyal, open and competent personalities? - Why do citizens have to wait fou r years to sanction an elected official? Is it possible to imagine a rapid dismissal mechanism in the event of betrayal of fundamental commitments? - Can we create a system where every electoral promise becomes a public contractual commitment, traceable, verifiable - and sanctionable? - How can we make the quality of parliamentary work visible and measurable for every citizen, above and beyond communication and media noise? - What tools could reward parliamentarians who cooperate with the opposition when a law is good, rather than those who obey sterile partisan discipline? - What if we redefined political merit not by ideology or party loyalty, but by the ability to keep our word, build useful solutions and embody the general interest? - How can Israel's political culture be made more mature: less divisive, less strategic, more focused on the quality of dialogue and the resolution of real problems? - Can we build a totally independent anti - corruption authority with real powers, capable of preventing conflicts of interest before they arise? - What would a system look like where individual ethics, transparency of commitment and collective competence became the only true currencies of political life? 1. Deep crisis of legitimacy and loss of confidence The Israeli people are expressing a deep mistrust of their political representatives, a mistrust fueled by repeated scandals of corruption, abuse of power and opportunistic behavior within the current political class. This crisis of legitimacy directly affects the very ability of Israeli democracy to function effectively, regularly paralyzing any attempt at ambitious and coherent reform. Faced with this alarming reality, how can we s ustainably restore citizens' confidence in their political institutions? It is urgent to completely rethink the criteria and mechanisms for selecting and evaluating elected representatives, with a clear focus on competence, integrity and a sense of the com mon good. 10 2. Rigorous new selection criteria for elected representatives a) The principle of open primaries Today, the way political representatives are selected has profoundly distorting effects. For example, the internal primaries of parties such as Likud are reserved for dues - paying members - a tiny minority of the population, often far more ideological than the general electorate. This shrinking of the electorate transforms the democratic contest into a biased competition, where the ability to mobilize internal influence groups - sometimes through clientelism, sometimes through promises of appointments o r fav ors - takes precedence over competence, uprightness or vision. This dynamic, far from being marginal, structures the political landscape: it favors the emergence of populist figures, served by networks of intersecting interests, to the detriment of personalities of integrity and competence. It shifts the parties' cent er of gravity towards their most ideological bangs. It silently installs forms of nepotism, economic codependence and opaque pacts. Above all, it undermines the ability of citizens to bring about a representation that resembles and uplifts them. The reform proposed here is clear: introduce open, transparent, universal primaries in all parties . This means that, rather than reserving candidate selection to a narrow and often more divisive activist base, every voter should be able to choose the candidates they wish to see on the list of the party they vote for . This simple yet powerful democratic mechanism would make elected representatives accountable not to an internal faction, but to their entire electorate - and, by extension, to the nation as a w hole. By breaking the link of dependence between elected representatives and their party's internal influence groups, the open primary re - establishes a virtuous circle: it selects personalities who are more responsible, more competent, more open to compromise, a nd more concerned about the consistency of their actions with their public commitments. It protects against career drift based on opportunism or ideological flattery, and re - establishes a dynamic where legitimacy is based on excellence and popular trust. The quality of the legislative process itself depends on the quality of elected representatives. Competent representatives, freed from the pressure of ideological clans or economic networks, can engage in more structured debates, open up more noble comprom ises, and produce fairer, more lucid, more robust laws. This is the way to restore confidence in people and efficiency in institutions. b) A direct, weighted selection mechanism focused on the common good In this new system, the open primary is not a separate, upstream stage organized by each party . It is integrated into the very heart of the national ballot : each voter, when choosing a party, also decides which of that party's candidates will represent him or her in the Knesset. In practical terms, each party will submit a broad list of potential candidates - for example, some forty names - but will not set any definitive order Voters will determine 11 the actual hierarchy of elected candidates, using an expressive weighted voting system that is both simple and powerful. Each voter will be able to give a limited number of candidates (5 to 10) a positive rating (+2) if he or she expressly wishes them to sit in the Knesset, a neutral rating (0) if he or she has no opinion, or a negative rating ( - 2) if he or she considers that the candidate should not be appointed to a legislative position. The scores will be aggregated, and the candidates with the highest net scores (i.e. the most supported, and least rejected) will be designated to fill the seats won by the party. This mechanism, inspired by Andrew Yang's electoral proposals in the USA, enables voters to produce a finer, more demanding democratic filter . It gives voice to both enthusiasm and rejection, and enables a form of qualitative hierarchization within a partisan vote. It introduces, for the first time, a direct, public evaluation of each candidate , not only in terms of popularity, but also in terms of his or her ability to inspire confidence, moderation and respect across the board. A recent example demonstrates its effectiveness: in 2022, in the state of Alaska, Sarah Palin - a former governor and nationally recognized figure in the American populist movement - ran in a congressional by - election. She benefited from a strong reputation and a loyal activist base, and came out well ahead in the first round. Under the old system, she would have been elected without difficulty. But this time, voters weren't just asked to choose their favorite candidate. They also had to rank the others. And this is where the system revealed its strength: a majority of voters, while choosing other profiles, ranked Palin last . Her deep rejection among moderate voters was enough to rule her out, in favor of an independent candidate, Mary Peltola, considered more competent, unifying and moderate. This type of ballot does not seek to designate the most visible or noisiest personality , but the one who generates the most clear - cut support, and the least active rejection . It therefore functions as a rational anti - populist mechanism , protecting democracy from its own emotional excesses, without ever confiscating citizen power. It allows voters to say no, without having to resign themselves to choosing between two evils. Applied to Israel, this model would prevent controversial figures, well placed on a list by partisan apparatuses, from automatically gaining access to the Knesset. It would pave the way for more sober, more honest profiles , more oriented towards public responsibility than media provocation. It would encourage the emergence of personalities capable of dialogue, arbitration and joint construction , in a fragmented society that needs bridges more than megaphones. Of course, this mechanism can be refined, evaluated and revised . It is not a dogma, but an experimental tool for democratic requalification . Its success criterion will be clear: party voters must recognize in their elected representatives faces they esteem, and 12 voices they respect. Men and women capable of defending their legitimate interests without betraying the general interest. Representatives who uplift, connect and protect. This is how representation ceases to be an artifact, and becomes once again a living link between the people and the laws. A link made up of lucid choices, reciprocal commitments and shared demands. 3. Behavior and responsibility of elected representatives Today's Knesset is not just suffering from a crisis of style and decorum. It is the scene of a deeper collapse: that of the very mechanisms of political responsibility. The current rules of the game encourage the worst reflexes of the party system. To main tain their position, the majority of parliamentarians have no choice but to please a restricted, often ideologized base, and to adhere unquestioningly to coalition discipline. The obsession with "winning", with bending one's opponent, with being seen as th e most loyal or the most combative in one's camp, leads to verbal outrage, intransigence and one - upmanship. Political debate becomes an arena for posturing, rather than a space for construction. In this context, parliamentary speech is instrumentalized. Electoral promises are erased in favor of partisan voting instructions. Compromises are seen as weaknesses. Opposition is reduced to obstruction. And the true artisans of democracy - those who list en, who propose, who seek what is right - are marginalized. It's time to change the rules of the game Augmented democracy also presupposes a new culture of parliamentary legitimacy. A culture that values real contribution to the general interest and the quality of deliberation. To achieve this, a clear system of valuation criteria must be established: - Consistency : respecting commitments made to voters, keeping one's word. - Utility : introducing or supporting legislation that meets real needs expressed by society - Attendance : effective presence of the parliamentarian at working sessions - Deliberative quality : ability to enrich discussions, bring in data, expertise and new perspectives - Constructive spirit : ability to propose compromises, to listen to the opposition, to co - construct even across party lines - Democratic creativity : formulating intelligent counter - proposals and actively enriching the texts submitted, including those put forward by the other side. These behaviors must be publicly recognized and rewarded , not only by public opinion, but also by concrete mechanisms: - A regular civic rating , made public, serving as a basis for media coverage; - Means bonuses : financially reward parliamentarians who truly contribute to the good of their constituents and compatriots ; - An exceptional status : the top 5% of parliamentarians - six elected representatives - would benefit from "electoral immunity": their seat would be protected at the next election, regardless of their party's overall results. 13 The aim is not to create a protected elite, but to ensure that civic excellence is supported, visible and inspiring. Changing the rules of the game means directing parliamentarians' ambitions towards what strengthens democracy: truth, listening, responsibility and construction. Changing incentives transforms behavior. And by transforming behavior, we raise the quality of public decision - making, the legitimacy of the assembly, and the resilience of the State. 4. Restoring the value of election promises The loss of confidence in political representatives stems not only from their individual behavior, but also from a system that does not require them to be rigorous in formulating and implementing their programs In Israel, the majority of parties present no clear, structured, budgeted and evaluated programmatic platform . People vote for a position, a camp, a rejection, a leader, but rarely for a precise action plan , built around measurable, achievable reforms. Public debate then drifts towards permanent anathema , the demonization of the opponent, rather than a confrontation of tangible, testable ideas. Even when proposals do appear, they are tossed around like slogans : with no costing, no timetable, no impact studies. No independent external authority is charged with validating the technical or budgetary coherence of the promises made to voters. Added to this is a structural contradiction of the coalition system : parties that are supposed to govern together may propose mutually exclusive measures, rendering any overall program unworkable. And when a government is formed, coalition agreements, negotiated in opacity , can empty election promises of all substance . The result is a systematic dilution of respon