Allies believe the U.S. is "No longer a good model of democracy," poll shows
By - ShaolinTom
Well, what do you expect when people in positions of power aren't held accountable for their actions? From law enforcement all the way up to capitol hill. It's a complete shit-show.
I think the most alarming aspect of it all - is that many Americans do not care.
They don't know, and do not care.
Edit again; I was drunk and added a link to a great song - that was meant for a different conversation. Enjoy the song! And my original point still stands. So for your reading pleasure - the gist of it is that most Americans are woefully disconnected from the rest of the world.
Some of them don't know.
Many of them know and care but don't know what to do about it or what they do just isn't enough to stop it.
Many of them know, and like what they see.
Seriously though what can I do to change this?
I joined my city Civil Service Commission. We set rules around hiring/firing/discipline/etc. it’s a small thing but I think more people should do it and make sure things are being run well. I’ve learned a lot from it.
What is that? And how do you join?
Contact your mayor or city leader. You need to be appointed but it’s generally a volunteer thing
I live in a small town in midwest USA. People normally picture the stereotype of who might live here when it comes to culture. We have only half a dozen flying the rebel flag and they, along with their house and family, look pretty much like you'd expect; family tree in the shape of the Olympic Rings.
There are a lot of us that are just sick and tired of seeing what's going on with police not being held accountable and politicians able to not represent the districts that elected them, either side, and still be in office. Or the worst case scenarios if pedophilia, trying to assist with the Capital Riot, so much else I don't have enough patience to type it on my phone.
Where do we start? What does everyone else want us to do? Protests can be done, are being done by some. Most of us here feel powerless or like we're screaming into a void. Corruptions everywhere, so what do you start with? It's to the point with politics that can anyone even fathom how hard it would be to start undoing any of it so those in office are all on the straight and narrow again?
Tell us where to start and if you know de way to fix it all. All ears.
I’d like to know the answer to this as well. How do you fight a system while trying to maintain a job, a family (if you have one) and still be a responsible adult while still trying to enjoy life and rest? One protest won’t change things, heck hundreds won’t even change things! Look at he problem with racism we have today, right now. The civil rights movement was over 50 years ago.
Politics has become a full time job. There’s so many facets;Local, state executive, legislative and judicial, federal executive, legislative and judicial. Multiple executive branch entities.
Yet we only vote once a year. 1 day out of 365.
It’s like we need a union but instead of negotiating with a company, it negotiates with the government. Or in the government. A people’s union.
Maybe we all need to dump the current parties we’re in and come up with a new one that encompasses both the left and right, one that’s more transparent, one that actually cares about what you say, what you want and your needs are. Ones who fight to make life better, such as fewer working hours to maintain standard of living. Ones who fight for the people and pass consumer protection laws, such as the right to repair. Rewrite tax laws to stop wasting time and money with tax returns.
One who finds a way to represent all people and not just a select group. Coming up with fair compromises.
I look at society and I can’t believe this is what we’ve come to. My parents tell me I should be grateful and feel lucky. I feel like that’s just justification for keeping things the way they are. Don’t get me wrong, I am grateful for a lot. It’s like they’ve been brainwashed to not question things and accept them as they are. They’ve both had to work 45 years of their life and will retire living check to check having almost nothing while others have multiple yachts and homes.
Something needs to change.
Could try starting local?
I mean what is else is there to do besides vote and bitch on social media?
Viva la revolution
Educate yourself and others, organize, protest, look into ways to sabotage and frustrate your class enemies, provide aid to the masses
Americans are fed up with the two party system, so even we are no longer convinced that we are a good model of democracy.
Edit: watch this video. Yes it’s that one. https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo
Usually when people are "fed up with the two party system", that means they want more parties, not fewer.
(edit - wtf is up with all you people wanting a one-party state? Isn't reddit banned in China?)
“The United States is also a one party state, but with typical American extravagance, they have two of them” - Julius Nyerere
"Yes, I'd like a large Democratic party, with a side of Republicans."
"That'll be $12.50."
"Ugh, I've only got $8. Just gimme a small Green party."
"We're all out, can I get you some Libertarian instead?"
"Gross! Forget it!"
Is... this a skit or real life...?
Real life, but the video is cut a little for comedic effect.
This looks like a scene out of Idiocracy lol
This literally scans as a comedy routine.
I mean, its the libertarian party so.....
Wait is it not?
Classic. Before opening the link I wondered whether it'd be the drivers licence video or the one where a candidate is booed for saying it shouldn't be legal to sell heroin to preschoolers.
Some of those candidates look genuine parodies of themselves. At first it looked like it was some sketch.
The Libertarian Party really became a festering breeding ground for anti intellectualism and white supremacy. Libertarian used to be more socially conscientious- i.e. my freedoms don't exist once they infringe on yours.
When I was a teenager I thought libertarianism was so cool and considered myself a libertarian. Now I just see it as “the government’s boots are yucky, but corporate boots are yummy.”
Yep. It’s usually either what you described above or “I completely agree with the GOP but smoke weed and I don’t absolutely hate my gay cousin so I don’t want to call myself republican”
I've watched crowds of young Republicans cheer on Milo Yiannopolous as he quips about sucking his black husband's cock. Somehow I think that homophobia is no longer a defining feature of Republicans, at least not those within the Millennial and Zoomer generations (and the younger Gen-Xers).
The old guard within the Republicans may be a different story, but they are dying off and losing relevance.
I believe in libertarianism. I don’t believe in libertarians.
Strongly advise not to order or touch "Green Party" on the menu.
You can tell them apart by what color tie they wear more often.
“Yeah I hate both sides. No I’m not gonna vote third party. Why would I want to throw my vote away?”
-Big brain voter
Edit: So I may or may not have stirred up a bunch of you hardliners, so let me toss out a few ideas:
1. So long as the majority is fine with Republicanism and Republicanism lite, shit will not change.
2. It will get worse (at worst) or everything will remain the same (at best). If you find comfort in that, know that complacency breeds contempt. We can be better, but I guess “the math checks out guys, that’s only the most logical thing to do!”
3. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
No longer convinced? A significant portion of our population doesn't *want democracy.*
Then clearly the democratic thing to do is not have democracy!
Allies are right. The people haven't been honestly and accurately represented in decades.
Correct. We cannot have a Democracy when the government is bought and owned by billionaires and corporations. We have an Oligarchy. That’s why we can’t pass the most basic reforms on infrastructure, healthcare, and wages. If U.S. Covid response didn’t prove that to people then I don’t know what will. The people were forced to sacrifice themselves on the altar of capital while corporations received endless handouts.
We won’t have a functioning Democracy until our system of open and legal corruption is abolished. Not until every penny of corporate money disappears from politics. Not to mention the voting/election reforms we desperately need on top of all of that.
We also can't have a democracy when 30% of the voting populace can hold the other 70% hostage.
U.S. is in desperate need of reform. A complete ban on corporate/billionaire donations (legal bribes). Grassroots only. End gerrymandering. End voter suppression. Implement ranked choice voting and stop suppressing 3rd parties. Abolish the electoral college. Abolish the filibuster.
And those are just the electoral reforms. We’re in desperate need of economic reforms that we can’t get due to the corporate capture of our government.
The corporations and media will whip the country into a frenzy of civil war before they allow those sorts of reforms to happen.
The oligarchs and the corporate media are extremely good at propagandizing the American people into turning on one another. They want your head filled with Red vs. blue, Liberal vs. Conservative, Left vs. Right, race vs. race, etc. Anything to distract the people from the fact that they have a common enemy: the oligarchs at the top who have been exploiting our labor and stealing & hoarding our wealth for decades while also ensuring we have very little Congressional representation.
Everyone needs to stop punching left, right, or down. Start punching up.
Can't punch up in America. Everyone is either the 1% or waiting to be the 1%.
*Everyone is either the 1% or foolishly believing the American Dream hasn't been dead and buried for 30 years.
>you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high water mark — that place where the wave finally broke, and rolled back.
The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge, and I knew we'd get into that rotten stuff pretty soon.
>I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
I have though often of what Hunter would have thought of the Donald. Damn I Miss that guy.
George Carlin said "It's called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it"
I always upvote Carlin.
[Inverted totalitarianism is different from classical forms of totalitarianism. It does not find its expression in a demagogue or charismatic leader but in the faceless anonymity of the corporate state. Our inverted totalitarianism pays outward fealty to the facade of electoral politics, the Constitution, civil liberties, freedom of the press, the independence of the judiciary, and the iconography, traditions and language of American patriotism, but it has effectively seized all of the mechanisms of power to render the citizen impotent.](https://www.truthdig.com/articles/sheldon-wolin-and-inverted-totalitarianism/)
>A complete ban on corporate/billionaire donations (legal bribes). Grassroots only.
Why bring money into it at all? Democracy should be about who draws more votes, not more donations. Campaigns ought to be publicly financed.
Honestly the biggest reform needed is getting rid first past the post. It cripples democratic representation so much. Choosing betweent two parties (both legally bought by corporations) is not a democracy
Canada's current Prime Minister ran on switching away from a FPTP system and immediately backed out of that promise. I expected it, but was quite disappointed nonetheless.
Same. Most people don't really think about how the voting system is fundamental to what is even possible to deal with politically.
FPTP *always* favours two large parties. Those two large parties will inevitably *become* the "establishment", and will tend to perpetuate some version of the status quo.
At least which are the contenders matters mostly on a Riding by Riding basis for Canada, so you can get differences between regions (thinking NDP & Green in BC and BQ in Quebec), but even if a third party breaks out of the FPTP trap, they *become* one of the two entrenched options.
In FPTP voters are forced to select the lesser evil. In a ranked ballot or some form of PR, you can truly vote for who you *want*.
It was why I voted for his party and also why I will never vote for his party again (unless I have to for strategic reasons... damn).
There will never be democracy while the poor stupid people let the rich people control them. The greedy Rich want to just get more money and they do no good with the money. They had no morals they do not think of helping the world only what they can get out of it. It's a hooray for me and f*** you attitude.
We'll never get out of this in FPTP system. It'll always favor two parties, and they'll always be corruptible.
> A complete ban on corporate/billionaire donations (legal bribes). Grassroots only. End gerrymandering. End voter suppression. Implement ranked choice voting and stop suppressing 3rd parties. Abolish the electoral college. Abolish the filibuster.
I can't imagine how any normal citizen could see any of these as bad things
From a Swedish point of view it’s really interesting with all those regulations with only one purpose to make sure people can’t use their right to vote. You have too few French genes to occupy the streets until someone listens.
See, you say that and I know a bit about Nordic history so I know about the protests in Iceland over austerity and how Danes and Norwegians basically made their countries ungovernable in the 1920s and 1930s and in I think 1989 in Denmark in order to secure higher wages for fast food workers pretty much the entire country went on strike. I wish there were a good book in English about the history of democracy in the Nordic countries. I've thought more about what that kind of activism would look like in the U.S. and it's not optimistic. In several states they've tried to make it not illegal to hit protesters with your car. The other problem is that the U.S. is so atomized that the people in cities, where it would be easiest to organize protests, are pretty likely to already agree with protesters, and lastly we have virtually no worker protections, so if you organize a strike at fast food restaurants there's a good chance you'll all be fired and they'll find someone else to work there. Plus, it's Republicans who are the biggest problem and many of them live in very Republican states, making it really hard to effectively put pressure on them. If we're at point A and point B is real democracy, I have no strategy to get there. As a Swede and a European, with more experience with this sort of activism, do you have any thoughts or ideas?
Idk, with the current labor shortage, and total closure of some businesses because of it, organizing a strike of the remaining workers might actually set things over the edge. The workers don't realize it yet but this is the most powerful position we've been in in the last century, since the depression and the new deal. Maybe it's time to start organizing such protests, if you're fired you can go on unemployment again as well, which is paying better than many people's jobs still. Corporate knows this, they will have to cave
If the Americans tried to protest in the same manner as Europeans their police would shoot them all.
And they'd lose their jobs, and subsequently healthcare coverage. Without a mass general strike, we're completely fucked.
Soon we are going back to Feudalism with Blackrock buying all those homes and paying 100k+ over asking price and forcing them to be single family rentals.
Doubt Biden is gonna step in because his cabinet is full of their people. Basically if you don't have a house now your are fucked.
Correct. That’s why the current administration is about to allow 11 million evictions to happen at the end of June. A favor for their criminal friends on Wall Street.
We already got the shanty towns in California. Shit is gonna get rough.
There’s this podcast I listen to with three constitutional historians and one political scientist who’s an expert on democracies outside the US. It’s always interesting to listen to the historians ask the political scientists questions about democracies around the world because his response boils down to, “No, they don’t do it that way because they saw how it worked in the US and decided to go in a different direction.” Basically, we were the guinea pig democracy that the rest of the modern world learned from. The only bad part is that the stability of the world depends on this fucked up experiment actually working.
What podcast is this?
I too would like to know what podcast he is referring to.
>tells everyone how the US Democracy sucks from a podcast
>doesn’t elaborate on the source
Yeah, it's funny when people use the fact that we've had the same constitution so long as a "positive". Like, you realize that just means that we don't have the advantage of the last 200+ years of improvement in constitutional theory, right?
I mean, it's impressive if you've got a car from the 50's that still works, but literally everything about driving would be better if you had a modern car instead... Acceleration, handling, braking, safety, lights, gas mileage, etc., etc... That's what decades of experimentation and improvements gets you, newer things are generally better.
Our Constitution doesn't need to be remade from the ground up because there exists an actual process for amending any part of it you want to. It's been done before almost 30 times by now to cover some really big shit.
Wanna abolish the EC? Allow DC to become a state? Ban private gun ownership? You can 100% do ANY of those things - but you have to get a massive swell of public opinion behind you, and the process is still going to be arduous.
Think of the Constitution as the source code for the US. You can go in and modify that code, but it was purposefully made to be a difficult task because screwing around can lead to very bad outcomes (see the 18th Amendment).
Oligarchy working as intended.
I mean this country was hijacked by the wealthy from the rip. That’s why the Constitutional convention was held tightly guarded behind closed doors. Even back then the ruling class knew how to paint lipstick on a pig and make the people think they lived in a democratic republic.
> I mean this country was hijacked by the wealthy from the rip.
It was founded by the wealthy*
Even though this is true to an extent… people don’t fucking vote. I live in one of the largest cities in my state and the 18-30 turnout was less than 10% of registered voters and we had incredibly easy early voting.
Yeah that’s cause back then half the population couldn’t read. The founders had legitimate concerns when it came to populism back then. If the founders were to see America today where virtually the entire population can read and where the public education system blows away anything 18th century commoners had, many would not feel the need to gatekeep politics.
Think I’m wrong? Andrew Jackson was the first President that is considered a populist and a “common mans president”. He is also responsible for some of the darkest chapters in American history (ex: Trail of Tears) and is one of the worst presidents in American History.
62% of Americans can't read at an 8th grade level, illiteracy is still a major issue in the United States and it's unlikely to change in the near future
That can't be true....
Have a source?
62% of Americans is a lot.
I was wrong, it's 52% but still ridiculously high for such a wealthy country
Or ever. Actually.
It's lobbying. That is literally our #1 issue at the moment that every single other issue derives from. When money buys laws and policy we become a plutocracy.
The very fact that businesses are allowed to give large amounts of money to a political party to influence their policy decision making is corruption in its purest form
Citizens United will go down as one of the final death throes of American Democracy.
It's such a misleading name, too - before I knew what it actually was, I thought it sounded like some kind of advocacy group that ensures the will of the people is represented. Instead, it just protects the will of corporations, which are apparently now people.
It's the GOP's bread and butter. The Patriot Act isn't even that "patriotic" to begin with.
>Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning the relationship between campaign finance and free speech. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The Court held that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, wealthy billionaires, and committees established for the purpose of fundraising (PACs).
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | Credit: kittens_from_space)
This is the answer. For as long as corporate lobbying exists, we will never see progress; unless corporations start lobbying the right politicians who are fighting for progress against things like climate change.
We ran out of democracy because of how much of it we exported to other countries
Clearly we need to bomb ourselves.
Not unheard of.
We bombed Tulsa and there was a full on civil war between miners and mining companies in West Virginia.
So, yeah, not unheard of at all.
Don't forget Philly and the MOVE organization
Lived in Tulsa heard nothing about it till senior year highschool.
Black wall st is so sad. Couldn't believe it happened in irl
>Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide
I don't know why but that quote is oddly kinda metal.
We already have done that in the past to residential homes in Philly back in the 1980s. But can't hurt to try again! /s
>The 1985 MOVE bombing refers to the May 13, 1985, incident in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, when the Philadelphia Police Department bombed a residential home occupied by the militant black anarcho-primitivist group MOVE, and the Philadelphia Fire Department let the subsequent fire burn out of control following a standoff and firefight. Five children and six adults were killed. Sixty-one homes were burned to the ground over two city blocks.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | Credit: kittens_from_space)
Holy shit that’s good
The US has legal bribes... this among other reasons means the US hasn't been an example for democracy for decades.
Are US citizens only now becoming aware of their broken government?
I honestly became aware while I was serving in the us military. I eventually just really started to look at what our government was doing and basically had an existential crisis. Realizing me and my friends could just go and die for these rich corrupt fucks to make some money.
Highest powers openly break laws and just plain refuse to go to court. Executions in the streets over nonviolent crimes, purposeful targeting of journalists and protesters. No wonder.
Dont forget corporations writing legislation for lawmakers to pass in exchange for money, kick backs or cosy position in the company. The biggest issue of democracy in America is the conflict of interest between government officials and corporations.
Edit: posted by u/CK_America
Yeah how we dont call those bribes bribes is amazing.
Don’t be silly. Bribes are illegal. These are legal. Therefore they cannot be bribes. There is no war in Ba Sing Se.
As a European, this is the part about your political system that amazes me the most by far.
we call open corruption lobbying so we can pretend we arent cartoonishly corrupt
>The biggest issue of democracy in America is the conflict of interest between government officials and corporations.
Debatable but definitely top 3.
Hit me with the list.
- the House not having expanded in the last 100 years despite the population tripling resulting is a literal decrease in democratic representation. Same principle for state legislatures. The US has 700k persons per rep (Delaware has 900k), more than any European state or the European Union.
- a small house necessitates large single member districts, or massive multi member districts that are incredibly expensive to campaign for, and dilute local representation at the Federal level.
- single member districts means that anything after 50% + 1 vote is entirely meaningless. Our elections are basically a sham that screw over minority ideologies.
- large unrepresentative cities that have a single police force which results on certain communities being effectively occupied by a foreign army.
- the current construction of the Senate that only has one senator per state up for election at a time. The result being that a single party can capture both senatorial seats despite only controlling 50-60% of the vote.
- a population that has been lulled into apathy or stirred into a fervor by a duel partisan system in which their side can do no wrong. If one so much as mentions that both parties are a problem, the partisan cheerleaders from each side will tell you why the other side are the bad guys and their side is the good guys and any nuance is tossed aside.
The ability to functionality bribe politicians is a result of these other problems and not vice versa. It would be near impossible to bribe a democratic body of 1000, 2000, 4000, or 10,000 persons, the lower number being the bare minimum threshold to consider the US democratic by any means.
edit: fixed some typos. I'm honestly surprises people can parse some of the things I write on my phone when I don't spell check myself. ~~Also, since this is getting a lot of attention, does anybody know why my Z and Y buttons changed places on my phone keyboard?~~ Solved. I'm just stupid.
I had never considered until now that extreme representation density was a problem at all, but it's so obvious being spelled out like this. Hell, if we pumped up our representation in both houses to match population density from when they were founded (coupled with ranked choice voting across all states & districts), the "price of doing business" would skyrocket, and mutual complacency would be that much more difficult to rely on to get away with it.
Here's another view of under/over representation that exists in the Electoral College - https://theconversation.com/whose-votes-count-the-least-in-the-electoral-college-74280
California and New York are underrepresented while Texas is over represented.
Pretty much explains the republican party's existence.
and bam, a fair representation is now an existential threat to the incredibly powerful GOP, therefore they will unite and fight it with the fury of a thousand rich oligarchs.
Well this is just a Democratic power grab and I'm disgusted you would support this
And then there's Wyoming...
And the Dakota's...there never should have been a split into a North and South Dakota
If we pumped up representation to the same portion as when we were founded, we'd have 8,533 representatives. Quite the shift.
Ranked choice is not the solution. Mixed member representation is. It guarantees seats based on voting for a party-including 3rd parties-eliminating the spoiler effect and allowing 3rd parties to make political inroads and form plurality coalitions.
It's unfortunate that so many people are unaware of this. Sure, if we had ranked choice you could vote third party without throwing away your vote, but if there is only one member per district then they are still going to belong to one of the two most popular parties most of the time. Australia is a great example of this: ranked choice voting with a two party system. We need multimember districts with proportional representation, and mixed member is definitely a great way of implementing that. Ranked choice would definitely be an improvement though, and it does have the benefit of not requiring constitutional changes.
Another huge factor suppressing smaller parties is that we have a single president instead of sharing executive power among a group of people like in most parliamentary systems. Just like with congressional districts, if only one person can be president they are almost always going to be a member of the two most popular parties. This takes oxygen away from smaller parties, because they can never have a chance of winning the presidency, a huge political prize.
The problem with it is it becomes more of echo chamber in politics.
You want to see a good, but not perfect example look at canada.
Vote gets to Ontario and then Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and BC are pretty much left in the cold. No party needs western Canada as long as they have most of Quebec and Ontario.
I am more of a fan of the Israel system. Tons of parties, force politicians to work together.
Just me tho.
Parliamentary systems with some sort of proportional representation seem the best at adequately representing everyone
Yep. Single member pluralities do little more than strengthen two political parties because the only feasible way to win is by having large parties and winning is required to have any political power.
The ability for everyone to be represented in a proportional way means you can vote for the politicians/parties you share ideals with and do so in a way that doesnt throw your vote away. No more would voting third party be something to mock but instead be a legitimate means for people to be able to influence our political sphere with.
I live in a country with a unicameral parliament and with proportional representation (most of the seats are elected in multi-member Grand Constituencies by proportional representation; the remaining top-up seats are distributed to ensure that proportionality is most closely attained on the national level).
It's actually pretty good. Not perfect, mind you, but it's good.
I would prefer it if new parties had a fighting chance, so we could start to climb out of our vicious cycle.
I dunno man you can arguably say the Israeli system has been fucked for the past 12 years or so. It's resulted in a *super* corrupt politician running things without majority support for the past 2 years as nobody was able to form a government.
This is just proportional representation. Ontario and Quebec has 55% of the population, and get ~55% of the representation in parliament.
This is also an unnecessary hysterical concern, considering Ontario and Quebec never go to a single party, with the NDP in Northern Ontario, and the Bloc in Quebec. It also seems to gloss over the fact Ontario is an extremely diverse province, that is competitive for seats between both the Liberals and the Conservatives. Contrast that with the prairies, who only ever vote Conservative.
>I am more of a fan of the Israel system. Tons of parties, force politicians to work together.
Your issue then is not with representation, but with the electoral system. Plurality voting (aka First-Past-the-Post) makes multi-party systems untenable and trends towards two party rule. If you want a multi-party system, you need a proportional voting system like MMP or STV.
After the 1920 census the rural interests saw the writing on the wall and flatly refused to reapportion congress until their power was permanently enshrined into law. It took until 1929 when reapportionment finally took place and we have never updated the numbers since. We've recreated modern day rotten boroughs and most people are none the wiser.
Let's add some more to that list:
* First-past-the-post voting enshrines a two-party system. It is possible for one party to fall from grace and be replaced by another, but three or more parties cannot coexist, greatly reducing the choices available to voters.
* The electoral college is fundamentally undemocratic. One man (or woman, etc.), one vote is the basis of democracy, but the electoral college means that some vote(r)s are worth more than others.
* In that same vein, the senate is fundamentally undemocratic. Each state has two senators, and each senator has the same voting power. This means that a senator from Wyoming, who represents 282 thousand people, has the same voting power as a senator from California, who represents 19 million people.
The FPTP one is what I was looking for. We sorely need some form of ranked choice voting. I need to get my arse to my town meetings and start pushing for it locally. Gotta start somewhere.
Ranked choice voting is better than FPTP, but only barely. Polities that use it usually have two dominant parties, with the rest being very small. It's not quite as bad as FPTP, but far from as good as proper proportional representation.
Good shouldn't be the enemy of less bad, but if you get the less bad solution, you might never advance to the actual good one.
Mixed-member proportional representation is where it's at.
Proportional representation or bust, IMO. That's the only way to completely get rid of the problems of Gerrymandering and single-seat electoral districts in one go. It's also the fairest system.
We abolished ~~FFTP~~ FPTP it in the Netherlands before we even gave women the or unlanded men the right to vote, because even back then they saw it was going to result in a two-party monopoly on power.
> * the current construction of the Senate that only has one senator per state up for election at a time. The result being that a single party can capture both senatorial seats despite only controlling 50-60% of the vote.
Holy shit - I never thought about this. That's not ideal.
Good list, but on the topic of corporations not being able to effectively bribe 1000's of officials, I do believe that you may be overestimating how expensive it is to bribe a politician. Some of the examples that I have seen is straight up affordable for an individual. Sure, the "bribe budget" would have to increase, but it is probably far far from impossible.
\^This guy knows what's going on!
The issue is that the US system forces politicians to cater to the lowest common denominator. European systems in general don’t have winner take all elections, which allow for more groups to be represented, and more nuancing in positions. How do you have nuance and multi-faceted approaches to problems when our entire system forces things to be binary.
Honestly this poll is very good, the last thing you would want is people in other democracies actually believing the extreme partisanship and inflammatory rhetoric going on in the US right now is a good thing. I like to check Fox News every other week to see what's going on over there and they seem to earnestly believe one half of the country is actively trying to undermine and destroy it, which makes any kind of understanding impossible. The fact this kind of propaganda as been normalized to this extent is extremely dangerous. There was a recent poll showing a majority of Republicans still believe Trump is the real president, even though there is zero evidence whatsoever of election fraud. How can you even have a proper discussion when people are living in a different reality?
According to the V-Dem Institute in Sweden, Republicans have been getting [more radical over time.](https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/10/31/the-republican-party-has-lurched-towards-populism-and-illiberalism) While the Democrats have been fairly static for the past forty years, ranking consistently alongside other countries' "normal" parties, Republicans have become *significantly* more extreme and illiberal over just the past decade (the Tea Party and Trump being major catalysts), and now are most similar to Europe's far-right parties, like UKIP, National Front, AfD, Fidesz, Lega Nord, and Golden Dawn.
Another survey done by Harvard [had similar findings](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21449634/republicans-supreme-court-gop-trump-authoritarian). And these surveys only cover them up to 2018-19. There's no doubt that the GOP have gotten *worse* since then.
Um congrats we always been imperialists just like the British. We just found a way to do it while still touting the illusion freedom and democracy while spreading suffering and stealing of resources.
All countries are like this. Government is all about control and subjugation 🙄
I remember in school they taught us that America wasn't like Britain, because we weren't an empire. I believed that for years, because why wouldn't I?
I didn't know any different, and frankly, a lot was left out of our modern history. We had a seriously white washed US history, which I excelled in... only to find out years later we were, in fact, a global empire; with our vast military machine everywhere enforcing our rule. We took what we wanted, invaded who we wanted, and overthrew anyone who didn't agree with us.
It took me a long time to come to grips with the reality.
As a foreigner I have to wonder, where is it properly democratic at all? Just the fact that there is zero chance that a 3rd party can ever establish itself with the current system in place is absolutely undemocratic for me. E.g. Presidential election: choose red or blue, otherwise your vote is wasted. Also the fact that all votes of a state, even if it's like 49:51 in percentage, go to one candidate afterwards is ridiculous. The whole system is stuck in the middle ages from my perspective.
Edit 2: Apparently alien and foreigner aren't synonyms, so I correct that to prevent misunderstandings, sorry for the confusion.
They use tradition as an excuse so they can maintain loopholes. Like gerrymandering being allowed as an example.
I really hate that excuse. "Well it's always been that way". So what, humans created it all, so why can't we dismantle it all and rebuild it.
They also don't seem to realize they'd be using that same excuse when we were trying to abolish slavery, or give women the right to vote, or the civil rights movement.
I find it hilarious that conservative is a political position. "Yah lets just keep it the same forever".
Life is about movement, change and adaption. When that stops in an individual it's called death; a species that can't will probably go extinct.
Conservativism is literally the anti-life philosophy.
The problem that most progressives don't realize is, in America saying what you just said is a rallying call and not a reality check. The people you're trying to make understand the things like the abolishment of slavery and the advancement of women/civil rights required protest+unrest+policy change etc. are the exact people who want slavery, misogyny, and segregation. That's why they vote and act so fervently against progressive causes, to them allowing any amount of progressivism means they lose direct control over "lesser" people.
Yeah that’s just lazy. It wasn’t always that way until we made it that way
that was the intent. The rich want control, so they buy politicians to maintain the status quo.
Its shocking to me that America gave the power to decide election boundaries to the people that those boundaries elect. I’m from the UK and we have an independent body that handles that and has to go through an entire process and justification, seems to be the same in most developed nations.
There are 4 and a half states with independent commissions for redistricting. I say one half cuz Iowa has an independent commission but then the state legislature votes to confirm it
Yup. Its extremely archaic. Just like the electoral college. Which was invented when we still used the Pony Express to deliver votes.
Way before the pony Express.
Add the fact the judges in the Supreme Court are selected by the political party that holds power. WTF?
Most countries treat the US as an example of what not to do on that point. Here we just create a list of a dozen or so qualified judges, send the names to an advising board, and they choose the judge to appoint. One thing that is a bit shocking is that supreme court justices in the US sometimes don't have a law background.
The US is one of the oldest still operating democracies.
That is maybe something to be proud of. But, it also means that other, newer democracies have been able to watch the US and learn from its mistakes.
The US founding fathers were pretty clever for a bunch of 30-50 year olds, and did think about some forms of checks and balances. OTOH, they were completely oblivious to all kinds of other ways their system could be exploited.
I guess if you give people centuries to game any system they're going to find a way!
If people can make it, then people can break it.
To be fair, the founding fathers also originally intended for the constitution to undergo multiple rewrites as time progressed.
That went out the window pretty quickly.
2/3rds ratification for anything is impossible with how polarized the parties are.
a plutocratic oligarchy masquerading as a democratic republic...
If I can try to explain a little about the 3rd party bit in the way it made sense to me when taught by my political science profs. As a disclaimer, I would love ranked choice voting and would love a viable 3rd party in the US.
The US absolutely does have a 2 party dominate system, but if you can a magnifying glass and look closely, you can see mini 3rd parties hiding within. It is very different than Parliamentary styles like Europe has with a specific 3rd organization. In parliamentary systems, the parties must come together and form coalitions to Certifier ruling majorities, what they are doing in Israel to oust Netanyahu right now, and in the UK with the SNP in Labour.
Both US parties have factions within them that act sort of like those coalitions and represent voting blocks within the voting blocks. The Democrats have the progressive wing, the Black Caucus, etc, and the Republicans have the Moderates (lots of names, Tuesday Group, Romney Republicans), the Liberty Caucus (think tea party Republicans) and now the Trump wing. The Trump wing used to be a minority but definitely have taken over the party to have significant influence.
All this to say is usually if a third party gains enough momentum, it will be absorbed into the closest aligning political party because they have the structure and funding base.
You're not wholly wrong. The 49:51 thing you talk about is called First ~~To~~ Past The Post. There are currently 2 states that don't do that (Nebraska and Maine), who divvy up their Electoral College votes proportionally. FTTP needs to go in my opinion, and more 3rd parties would be able to make their mark.
/edit. Thanks for the correction.
//editedit [jman9420](https://reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/nwouit/allies_believe_the_us_is_no_longer_a_good_model/h1bzyco) adds on for more clarification.
*First Past The Post
Yeah, even in Poland which is considered an endangered democracy 3rd party in a few years could grow big enough to be the force to be reckoned with.
I hate the two party system
Lobbying has gotta go. Legalized bribery.
They're about 30-50 years late on coming to that conclusion.
Well it has gotten much worse recently.
No, the wealth gap has simply widened enough for demographics originally somewhat sheltered from all the issues to be exposed and victimized as well.
This is the fate of all long running institutions, be it a private company or an entire empire. Corruption and nepotism and baseless traditionalism seep in, people get complacent. In the case of countries, wealth gap widens as a result of corruption, and all sorts of issues previously buried by having a large middle class come to light to that middle class's now impoverished children.
Plus whatever the US's done before, it was mostly done to poorer countries or geopolitical adversaries. Their allies either also benefited or were unaffected so they don't care. But recently these allies have felt the burn as well, from refugees created by wars mostly driven by US interests, to getting blocked and tariffed on trade and called names. So yeah they are speaking up.
Nope, it's always been this bad, you're just becoming more aware
We were often the reason that those countries weren't democratic so it's not really a surprise that that process is turning in on itself.
To be fair...it is heavily due to America's acts of imperialism that these nations are stuck in these shitty systems to begin with.
I mean think about it. Where would the Middle East be if we weren't tearing it apart during the 1900s for some oil and crowd control? Or the nations we used as battlefields in the Cold War?
For sure, that's exactly what I meant. "We" was the USA. I'm totally with you on the cold war battlefields, especially (speaking of democracy) the ones where the USA operated covertly to overturn democratic elections because we didn't like the results. Now we say refugees of these states in Latin America with governments created by the USA aren't welcome crossing our borders. And like you said, this is beside the decades long campaign of destabilization in the middle east to access its natural resources.
What with all the shit going on lately, I read it as "aliens" not "allies" and didn't even blink an eye at first
The US needs a new Teddy Roosevelt to come in and help to reset thing. Back in early 1900s it was the same type of corruption we are seeing today. It went as far as lawmakers creating legislation to blackmail companies to pay them not to pass it.
"A good model of democracy" doesn't overthrow other democracies and installs dictators for its own interest.
Then that disqualifies like, most of the G7 nations lol.
Was the US considered a good role model of democracy 10 years ago?
Americans also feel this way
>you supress protests with a level of violence practically unheard of in the West
*the UK has entered the chat [with their new bill](https://www.bigissue.com/latest/social-activism/how-priti-patels-new-policing-bill-threatens-your-right-to-protest/)*
> (yeah, I know there's two exceptions)
Don't hold your breath. Republicans in Nebraska are actively working [as I type this](http://update.legislature.ne.gov/?p=29312) to go back to ~~re-instate the winner take all method~~ the dumb way that 48 out of the 49 other states use.
People keep saying we need a third party, I wish we had two.
money and what’s the other one?
It was amusing that Harris was in Guatemala lecturing them about corruption. Almost all of our politicians are bought and sold by their corporate masters.
What gave it away
I believe there are a couple of things we can do.
1. Get rid of this 2 party system
2. Get rid of “citizens united” and take more measures to get money out of politics
Whats the point of voting for people if they’re only bending to the wishes of their dark money corporate donors? Both sides are guilty of this.
Imagine when cooperations have to “bribe” the people with proper wages and benefits, instead of the corrupt politicians
The world currently has no good model for democracy. It’s a series of oligarchical republics masquerading as democracies.
What we need is an anarco syndicalist commune where we take turns as a sort of executive officer for the week. An automous collective. Not the imperialist oligarchical republics masquerading as democracies. Now you see the violence inherent in the system.
I see Monty Python, I upvote.