What are the problems with this version (the archives have many) of democratic market neo-communism? The executive agency seems to be far too powerful, a danger of the model, perhaps, until you consider that the single task of preserving the foundations of communism, with most others powers mediated by a set of separations of powers.
We will repost this again, on the way to a recompute and new draft anon: the basic model however is an attempt to reconcile liberalism and communism in a new format that can attract many who cannot adjust to the rigors of communism (not that such as the marxists can give it a decent account). There is no way to avoid this, because the liberal framework, for better or worse, is the default vehicle for an intelligent secular majority. To change that requires a new and balanced approach that can lead the liberal/leftist to the deep insights of such as Marx, but without the baggage and trappings that are dated now. The point is simple: a revolution must increase freedom in the modern sense. Communism can surely do that, but the example history shows of starting with Tsarism and proceeding to Bolshevism with no rights and liberties was flawed from the start.
And make no mistake: we are talking about a form of communism, but without the confusions that sank the Second and later Intenationales.