"The US is no longer a democracy. One of the most credible global sources on the health of democratic nations now says this outright."
It hasn't been a democracy for a long time.
It's a corporate kleptocracy, to which one can currently add the adjective kakistocratic.
Probably because the US was the first modern democracy, one that invented itself from first principles. They thought they'd got it right but in fact it was badly flawed, and more modern democracies have greatly improved the idea. There's an implicit cultural arrogance about being the first that makes Americans ignore the dangers. I remember the sense of triumph when Obama won in 2008, as if after the Civil Rights acts and a Black president, the US couldn't regress to the bad old days.
Sigh, @riggbeck. The United States was designed to be NOT a democracy.
Read the Federalist Papers. The lack of democracy is not a bug. It's a carefully-designed core feature.
And @wood5y, the lack of democracy is not some sort of recent flaw. It is undemocratic ab initio.
A significant number of states ran overt apartheid until the 1960s. Now, the #WarOnDrugs pursues the same goals.
A claim that the #USA has ever been a democracy relies on igmoring apartheid, which is a racist stance.
You must be thinking of 'democracy' in absolute, idealistic terms. All institutions are created within certain existing power structures. The US designed as much of a democracy as it could allow itself. Hence the improved models in other countries.
I'm more interested in what we can do now.
@riggbeck are you serious?
Do you you really think that absence of #apartheid is some sort of idealistic adornment, rather than a core attribute of #democracy? Really?
Only in a country founded on racist violence would anyone try to deny that apartheid is a disqualifying feature of democracy.
The Federalist Papers are very clear that the drafters of the constitution saw democracy as a vice to be prevented. Why do you not believe them?
@riggbeck and if you are "more interested in what we can do now", then the most important first step is to be honest about where you are now.
You have a system carefully designed to be not a democracy, and which in every era has entrenched anti-demicratic power. A system which throughout its history has always enforced systematic doublespeak, and venerated violence.
If you want something better, start by confronting that reality rather than perpetuating falsehoods.
@riggbeck You seem v dismissive of history, almost contemptuous. That stance rarely ends well.
The 18th-century definition is what impelled the drafters of the constitution to design a framework which aimed to permit slavery and prevent majority rule. They succeeded on both counts.
The contemporary definitions of democracy require that any effort to build better involve explicitly trying to avoid the errors of the past, such as imperialism.
Democracy or empire. Choose only one.
There you go. Fill your boots. But take any further questions up with the World Population Review.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/democracy-countries
@riggbeck If you had some substantive argument in support of the bizarre claim that coerced voting is democratic, then the debate could be interestihg.
But "oh no it isn't" is just #pantomime speech.
Steve Woods
Fardels Bear
Claire McNab
Dave Freedman