I could see your ruthlessness being on par with a Lenin. Actually, the way you defend your stances and critique others is very Leninesque.
I'm not sure that our technological advances, and the real-time inter-connectivity it affords to nearly all citizens, doesn't render a representative form of government as archaic, and unnecessary. One person, one vote, majority wins. We would need a government system / overseers to carry out the will of the people, but none to actually decide it. Checks and balances would obviously remain firmly in place, but "The People" would replace "The Legislative Branch", wherever feasible. It'd be a markedly different world, and a nightmarish one for some, and a utopian one for others. Overnight.
Could do it Athenian style, where much like jury duty a random pool of several hundred thousand/million are selected to vote for a particular session.
I like the idea of unilateral action, but don't like the idea of absolutely removing all say from anyone and everyone, which is what Putin has done. Unilateral action would allow gov't diminution like has never been seen in a place where pols vote to save jobs and votes.
I'm on board, I want something that addresses the concerns instead of transffering the problems to a different political engine.
Take away the majority of subsidized benefits and they'd be more engaged in the system. It would also do wonders for education.
A blank slate, for one. Start from the ground up. We can heavily draw from the current Constitution, but start fresh, with huge footnotes to be sure there is no misunderstanding 100 or more years later.
How amazing would it be for a constitutional convention. I honestly think people don't care enough to take such a step.