Which Bad System is Worse: The US or Britain?
How flushable should these turds be?
The US and UK both have highly unpopular leaders. The traditional way of replacing a leader — splitting his head open with an ax and drinking mead from the skull — is a non-starter. The two countries’ systems for changing leaders are functionally opposite, yet, strangely, each seems like the worst possible system conceivable. At least, until you look at the other.
British leaders get changed as often as underwear; American leaders get changed as often as a Frenchman’s underwear.1 The British government can be evicted at any time and the ruling party can swap leaders without changing governments; this allows flexibility but leads to chaos. At the other end of the spectrum, electing an American president is like dating someone right before they get a cancer diagnosis: You have to stick with them for a while even if you regret your decision. If the systems were musical styles, the British system would be jazz (improvisational, sucks) and the American system would be folk (unchanging, also sucks).
