America deserves to be recognized as a Third World Country. I say this as an American, it’s deplorable how the citizens are treated.
The cold war is over, they are called developing countries now. Your point still stands, the US has lots of developing to do, especially on the social/society front.
It doesn’t meet the definition of “developing nation” either.
South Sudan is a third world country. America isnt third world, it’s heading into authoritarianism.
To be clear- this is just your personal “vibe” and not an actual fact, because the term “third world country” literally means a country that is not aligned with the US or USSR. If you meant “developing nation” that term also has a definition the US does not meet.
I think the term is “A third world country with a Gucci belt”
We’ve been a third world country for a several decades already. Just because we use to change out guys in the office every 4-8 years, doesnt mean it was ever all that good here.
Could? …should.
Has lost*
Probably won’t get it back
We should have never had the status given we still use slaves.
Having a for-profit prison system was a bad choice.
Who could have seen it coming ?
And a pay to win political candidate system, and a heavily monetized educational system. Who is surprised about the decline of the man who steps on his dick and machineguns his own foot?
Land of the free founded on slaves. America really is just a big pile of hypocrisy under the hood of vain surface level patriotism.
“Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…”
Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947
The US is one of the most watered down democracies, even for a liberal democracy (which is severely watered down). Its a system where the needs of the many are filtered through the needs of the few. We dont need to “fix” liberal democracy, we need workers democracy (syndicalism).
What are you even talking about, lol?
I think what they mean is, in theory in Democracy the majority decides about political actions by electing their representatives who in turn act on their behalf. In the US this is heavily manipulated by e.g. only giving a very limited number of choices which dont represent most peoples opinions. Not everyones opinion is worth the same, you buy influence with money.
Do you really think that the previous poster understands that? I highly doubt that.
What makes you think so?
There’s nothing liberal about US “democracy”.
Liberal democracy has a fixed definition, its not a term they came up with.
That doesn’t mean they understand that term.
It lost that status a long time ago. We keep the veneer of it intact, though.
Most of the “Democracy” status countries are bull shit anyway. They are heavily weighed on “Economic Freedom” which is a fancy way of saying the freedom for which Imperialist nations corporations are able to exploit third world countries resources.
Nationalize your oil system and have the profits of it go directly back to your people for the improvement of social programs? Damn, that sounds like Communism!
Sell oil drilling rights to Shell to “bring jobs” to your country that pay poverty wages, destroy local ecosystems, and extract all your resources with no benefits to the local population? Well, that’s “Economic Freedom” baby!
First of all, that’s not what “Economic Freedom” means in the context of democracy, but more importantly “economic freedom” is not even a factor in the methodology used by the group this article is citing.
I wasn’t referencing the article I was speaking more generally on things like “Democracy Index” or others that care more about a country having unregulated free markets than they do about citizens having healthcare. This is often what these “democracy” surveys refer to as Economic Freedom. You can pretend it’s how they act like it’s defined like “oh the government can’t tell you what business you can run as a poor mom and pop shop”. But in reality it’s the biggest players that benefit from unregulated markets on a global scale.
It’s why a capitalist hellhole like Argentina is considered a “flawed democracy” and Cuba is considered “Authoritarian”. It’s just neoliberal bull shit.
Is this just your vibes or do you have a source? Because I just checked the website of the organization this article is referencing and it says no such thing.
Anyone surprised by this? Anyone? Because I’m not.
We haven’t had a vote on the shape or priorities of our economy since 1980. This is an economic dictatorship, and has been longer than most of us here have been alive.
We just get a vote on how/if to address the social wedge symptoms that economy either causes or exacerbates.
And only IF addressing them won’t meaningfully harm quarterly earnings expectations for our sociopath class. Example: you know what would drastically reduce the number of abortions without any kind of ban? A living wage that can support a family. But that would cut into corporate metastasis and is therefore a non-starter by either party in anything more than rhetoric.
You can have scapegoating® or affirmation ribbons(D), so long as you vote for for profit prisons, legal murder for profit, millions of Americans dying of exposure on the streets, crumbling commons, public education in utter ruin… Freedom!
New banana republic just dropped!
It’s not exactly new, it’s just that we’re seeing clarification of changes that have been in the works for the last 20 years or longer, depending if you want to go back to Reagan.
And not surprisingly, he has to try to grab power as quickly as possible. If things collapse slowly then the people will still have the ability to rise up against him.
Old banana Republic just dropped!
Could? Lmao. Don’t you need laws and elected officials to count as a democracy to begin with?
Removed by mod
Have you read the US Constitution? How is this misinformation?
I’m pretty impressed by that mod action frankly. In a bad way.
reminds me of reddit, also in a bad way.
One thing about Reddit though is you couldn’t see the mod log and know which subs were run by crazy people.
Or just U.S./Corporate tools.
- Democracy isn’t a status given by some watchdog.
- Democracy is shit
Anything else than democracy is shittier
“Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…”
Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947
Demonstrably false.
Go ahead and demonstrate it then
Easy: democracies don’t last long compared to the other forms government. So they can’t be better than other forms of government.
Only for those who prefer the taste of boot leather.
We await patiently for your demonstration.
What’s the longest lifespan of a democratic state in human history? Now compare it to the average lifespan of monarchies, for example.
The measure of whether a system of government is good or bad is not “how long it lasts”.
It’s the main criterion. If the system doesn’t last, then it’s shit regardless of what it is. The main purpose of the government (and any organization, for that matter) is to exist for as long as possible, everything else comes second. I wonder what other criteria do you have in mind?
- 482 years
- 636 years
Roman Republic wasn’t a democracy. It was ruled by aristocratic families. Lol.
The argument is that they were a democratic republic.
several popular assemblies of all free citizens, possessing the power to elect magistrates from the populace and pass laws; and a series of magistracies with varying types of civil and political authority.
If you’re referring to direct democracy, I suppose we could consider the Athenian democracy, though I think there are other examples from different regions on the planet through antiquity.
It was ruled by aristocratic families.
We’re not so different after all!
okay russian shill, go back to /ML/.
Oooh edgy.
I’ll guess they are a college freshman or younger.
So you’re all for dictatorships then?
Democracy and dictatorship is not a dichotomy.
It kinda is, everything falls on that scale, either people are being represented and representing themselves or they aren’t. Everything else is just the mechanics of that.
Was Roman Republic a dictatorship?
I don’t know much about Romans. Eventually it became an empire with an emperor and all though.
Roman Republic exited for 500 years before Roman empire. They were the first to implement the division of government into 3 branches, so I guess they weren’t a dictatorship? They actually invented the word “dictator”. It was temporary authority given to the head of the state at the times of emergency. So, most of the time Rome wasn’t a dictatorship. And it wasn’t a democracy.
What do you mean by that?
- Do you mean electoral politics is fundamentally flawed?
- Do you mean direct action by the working class (workers democracy) is better than liberalism?
- Or are you just begging to have the orange tyrants foot deep down your throat?
-
Yes. Obviously.
-
No. Both are shit.
-
No.
Looking at your past comments would suggest you’re a bootlicker
Well, seems like your deductive capabilities are subpar. Don’t try suggesting thing again, you suck at it.
-
deleted by creator
Really? Seems like we had a peaceful transition of power just this year.
Democracy isn’t defined solely by peaceful transfer of power. Our government is completely captured by monied interests. Public opinion has a near zero influence on policy.
'Bloodless coup" comes to mind…
We peacefully transitioned into a technocracy with a wanna-be dictator idiot at the helm.
As an exercise for anyone reading this who doesn’t already know: How did Hitler got into a position of power? Look that up, don’t use AI, actually check up on that yourself.
Wait a minute, so democracy brings people like Trump, Hitler and Hamas to power? Does it mean that democracy is shit?
How about single party socialism? Has that ever turned back into stateless communism, comrade? Or did it turn into “socialism with Chinese characteristics”, Putin’s Russia, Pol Pot, and the DPRK that Trump wants to turn the US into?
The Khmer Rouge was never socialist, they were some weird feudal ideology, hence why the CIA supported them and the US recognized them as the legitimate government of Cambodia for like 30 years after Vietnam liberated them and put an actual socialist government in power.
Russia hasn’t been socialist since 1992; Putin’s Russia is what happens when you overthrow a democratic state run by the workers for the workers with a vibrant, multiparty capitalist “democracy”.
“Socialism with Chinese characteristics” is more democratic than the US; the average Chinese person feels they have far greater influence on the government than the average American. They tend to be confused why Americans hate and fear the police and why we aren’t able to vote for politicians who will fix the problem.
There’s also Cuba, who had a referendum on a new constitution a few years ago. After years of debate at the community level, they came up with a final draft that 92% of Cubans voted yes on. Could you imagine if we had that level of influence over our own government?
See the thing you’re missing is that the communist parties of these countries themselves democratic; they’re typically structured such that every member above the rank-and-file is elected, with instant recall and “give us a better candidate” options.
Yeah it’s really amazing the number that Western propaganda has done on folks perception of China
They assume democracy requires more than one party. When it should be people you vote for, rather than raw tribalism.
The Khmer Rouge was never socialist
They weren’t socialist bc they took a step past socialism and into communism directly. They abolished money, replaced army with armed militia, achieved direct democracy, abolished institution of family, replaced farmers with agrarian proletariat, achieved 100% public housing. USSR is a capitalist shithole compared to Democratic Kampuchea.
Communism isn’t when everyone lives like a farmer from 200 BC.
I’m not a communist bro.
Technically the Nazis lost that election, but the Conservatives who won turned around and handed power to Hitler, all to prevent the Left from gaining power.
That’s not how elections work here. There is not really a “winner” in elections unless someone gets an absolute majority, which is almost never. Parties form a coalition to have a majority together.
That’s how it is nowadays, but I think the old system had coalitions too.
Alien school: For todays class we will begin Earth history, please open your text book titled “Earth: All to Prevent the Left From Gaining Power.” This book covers the vast majority of Earth history.
Unironically though, you can see the same pattern going all the way back to Rome.[Michal Parenti’s The Assassination of Julius Caesar]
Something about the history of all hitherto existing society being the history of class struggles.
Just a dictionary thing, Technocracy != tech bro president:
Government by technical specialists.
A system of governance where people who are skilled or proficient govern in their respective areas of expertise. A type of meritocracy based on people’s ability and knowledge in a given area.
When you call someone a technocrat, it means they’re more interested in research and quality than political debate
The US has purportedly been a technocracy for a few decades now. The second election of Trump will likely mark the end of the technocracy and the official start of something worse…kakistocracy, full blown oligarchy, kleptocracy, pick whatever word you want.
The administrative state – the exact thing Elon and his doge goons are targeting – is the home of the technocrats.
I would assume most monarchies transitioned just as peaceful. What does that prove?
Every 4-8 years to all elected opponent?
No, but it’s irrelevant to the question.
I mean, term limits don’t make a democracy and there have been elective monarchies.
The Vatican is an elective absolute monarchy.
When do Catholics vote for the Pope?
When the Conclave elects a new one.
…You might want to study some more history there bub
Sure mate. Hereditary successions were usually smooth. In elective monarchies, there were more power struggles. Do you have anything to add other than insults?
Not to mention that monarchies last way longer than democracies on average throughout history.
Is that so? I would assume democracies last a lot longer than 10 to 50 years? Considering that most of the world has democracies and they tend to be at least since WW2 that does not feel right.
Considering I don’t know any democracy that laster longer than 200-300 years and there are a lot of monarchies that lasted for many hundreds or even thousands of years.
Optical illusion. Plutocrats sharing power among themselves is not democracy, friend.
conspiracy theories about elections are hardly democratic
I’d hardly call it a conspiracy theory that both the Democrats and Republicans serve the wealthy.
“sharing power” implies that non-plutocrats are not involved in the decision, i.e. implying elections are fake
Did you just get radicalized? Yes they are basically fake.
To quote Bill Hicks, sometimes the ship leans a little to the left and sometimes it leans a little to the right, but it’s still going the same direction.
But now it’s going clear off to the right, which actually fucked with a lot of neoliberal agendas that they’ve been enacting for decades regardless of who was in office.
And I hesitate to even call that a real election, even though the train went off the rails. Considering Trump blabbered about how Musk helped him steal it.
yeah you weren’t going to vote either way
Your conclusion is wrong, in that I didn’t say they’re fake, I said that they serve as a way for different mega wealthy people to take turns at serving their own interests. Which may be a synonym or not, depending on your perspective.
But I did imply that non-plutocrats have zero sway in elections, because of how the system is stacked for the two parties because of many different aspects, but one of the obvious ones is just how much money you need to run a successful campaign.
I didn’t know Bernie Sanders was a plutocrat. Just because one race is inaccessible from the working class doesn’t mean all elections are rigged.
Learned helplessness.
It’s not about the elections it’s about who gets the support and opportunity and resources to win elections.
A footrace can be executed completely fairly and transparently but if you need to buy special expensive shoes to participate and you receive them at someone else’s discretion and you need to join one of two private clubs to get an invitation and the leaders and members of those clubs also apply discretion then a lot of unfair choices and decisions are being made before the starter pistol goes off.
What part of it is theory? Citizens United was the final confirmation that made it legal and ever since it’s done in broad daylight.
The only party willing to accept defeat and not cry foul until their cult riots lost. It will never happen the other way around are you’d have be to a deeply vastly empty head to not know that.
That makes one in a row now.
Degree of democracy has more to do with the size of the ruling coalition relative to the size of the pool of the interchangeables. When power is shared within a large ruling coalition, there tends to be a louder and more influential voice by the interchangeables, leading to more democracy and better living conditions for everyone, including those in the losing coalition. Autocracies on the ruling spectrum tend to have tiny ruling coalitions.
Source: my memory of reading The Dictator’s Handbook by Bueno de Mesquita and Smith. Highly recommended reading.
If the ruling coalition of the US is much smaller than it appears to be, then yeah, it’s at risk of losing its foothold as a democracy.
That’s not the only quality of a democracy.
How many eligible voters abstained?
Is there any way to tell who abstained and who just chose not to take time off work so they could pay their bills?
Unfortunately the system is fucked.
Yeah for sure.
How long is the voting window? Is it like 9-5?
It depends on the state. It does tend to be a bit broader than that and most states allow early voting.
However, red states tend to put more hurdles in to maintain their power, limiting polling access in working class districts, especially ones that aren’t predominantly white. Forcing folks to stand in long lines or get across town to cast a ballot. Or scrutinizing and tossing out more mail in ballots in those districts over something petty. Folks don’t have the spoons for that between bills, kids, work, and chores.
Also factor in that a lot of folks abstained because they know their state is already blue or red, and at least, in the swing state I live in, the turnout was actually very high.
Anyway, it’s not as simple as 1/3rd of folks abstained. While I imagine some did, just out of apathy toward the federal government and not understanding how dangerous Trump is to our planet, it’s just not the whole story is all I’m saying.
The US has a long history of making voting a privilege based on class. And while on paper it’s not supposed to be the case, there are certainly mechanisms at play that disinfranchise folks who would likely otherwise vote.
And a few days after that, PragerU releases a video titled “Why democracies will fail eventually”, which tells its viewers that democracy creates “moral decadence”, and now a “strong leader” is needed to fix the issue, who might have told some noble lies like a parent tells their kid the stork brings the children when they’re not ready for reality. And the video ends with a “Roman salute” over “God Bless America”.
People tell their kids the stork brings babies because the parent is the one not ready to have the conversation.
The parent is avoiding their own humiliation. Telling kids how babies are made is not embarassing for kids. Kids have no reason to feel shame or judgement about these kinds of things….
Just pointing this out to show that the metaphor here is deeply flawed.
3-4 year olds don’t need to know about birds and the bees
Sex, procreation is not a horrible perverted thing. It’s biology, science, and should be explained as soon as they’re curious enough to ask.
Knowledge of bodily functions seems to concern you. That is your problem, not the kids.
It literally matters zero percent if kids know how bodies function.
The fear and judgement is all in your head lol.
It’s not even the matter of how the body works it can lead to them watching porn and shit early on which isn’t good cause kids are curious and google exists literally speaking from personal experience I was told way to early on by older friends and it lead to shit I don’t need to get into
You need some therapy. Telling kids the truth about how our bodies work early on doesn’t harm them, but maybe your parents not talking to you about it and your older friends having to do it, perhaps in a crude way, is what led to that shit you don’t need to get into.
That’s the problem. You were told by friends who left you with questions you answered in unsafe ways, not by adults who could answer your questions in an age appropriate way.
Giving kids age-appropriate sex-ed is a good way to protect them against predators. Many victims don’t even know something wrong has been done to them because people like you are too afraid to give them the barest guidance.
Dude, they’ll watch porn either way probably. It’s more likely if you make it taboo that they’ll get into some weird shit. If it’s normalized then it’s not some mysterious thing they need to discover on their own. Your thought process is what leads to kids watching porn too young. They’re going to learn about it, like you did from older friends. If your parents made it normal to discuss maybe you’d be healthier.
I was told way to early on by older friends
There’s your problem.
You were clearly abused by the church :(. I’m sorry that happened to you.
No
lol I watched porn hella young, I never got a talk, greatful none of my searches at like 10 were connected to an older family member, fbi showing up wouldve been wild
Lots of 3 to 4 year olds are perfectly aware that they have a future sibling brewing in mom’s tummy.
Lol, tell me you’ve never been on a farm without telling me.
3-4 year olds don’t need to know about birds and the bees
Why not? It’s interesting and biology is part of the natural world around us.
Some kids probably won’t care but others will be super interested. Start the conversation and see where it leads.
I hate that I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or if this really happened
