Democracy isn't absolute. I'd rate US style democracy 6 out of 10, while Russia is 2.
The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
31–40 of 87 posts
Re: The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
#32How can a country be democratic with only two parties?
I'd like to think that it's twice as good as a one-party system.
Not sure whether you're serious or joking, but in the realm of economics, I think that duopolies are actually worse than monopolies, because everyone recognizes that a monopoly needs to be strictly regulated and/or broken up, whereas when there's a duopoly, that's supposedly "competition" and thus the duopolies largely escape regulation or breakup, even if they implicitly or explicitly cooperate and coordinate to crush any other competition.
In the same way, the obvious solution to a one-party system is to overthrow the government, whereas with a two-party system, you're supposed to fight within the system... and mostly accomplish nothing, because those in power have overlapping interests.
Re: The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
#33How can a country be democratic with only two parties?
You should think of it this ways.
In the us, political groups for coalitions before the election happens. This is in contrast to most European countries where they set up the coalitions afterwards. Groups occasionally migrate between the parties and the us is in one such realignment now.
Re: The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
#34One measure of democracy is how much say you have in issues which affect you, the running of your neighborhood, your government etc.
If you look at decision making at high levels, the general population usually gets ignored. Instead, powerful special interests dominate the government.
Particularly with regard to foreign affairs of the USA, the oil lobby and weapons manufacturers. And look who's benefiting from the current state of affairs in Ukraine, Iran and Venezuela: US arms manufacturers and oil companies.
On the other hand in many ways people in the USA are extroardinarly free, there's pretty good protection of freedom of speech.
Re: The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is why, instead of "democracy", it's more useful to quantify democratic . One traditional measure of such is the degree to which political power can be gained through free elections. But the research in TFA instead uses a novel measure: the weight a population has in its country's policymaking. Which yields fascinating results. Because, per the linked research, in present-time USA that weight is ~zero. Which is…
Isn't this partly a question of sheer size of countries like the US and India? In Slovenia or Denmark, there may be two degrees of separation fewer between the regular voter and, say, an ordinary MP, because the parliaments and government are about the same size, but the population is in single millions. Even here in Czechia quite a lot of people actually know personally some high-ranking politician. How many America…
> How many Americans are on friendly terms with their Rep or Senator?
I would imagine if you limited this to folks with $100MM+ net worth, the percentage wouldn't be so low.
Re: The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
#36How can a country be democratic with only two parties?
This is a direct outcrop of the winner-takes-all electoral district system which forces parties to merge to have a chance at winning. I personally find it an undemocratic, archaic and meritless system.
It was revolutionary and progressive, in the 13th century... Now, not so much.
Re: The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a direct outcrop of the winner-takes-all electoral district system which forces parties to merge to have a chance at winning. I personally find it an undemocratic, archaic and meritless system.
electoral district system? this seems to be very specific and a subset of the topic/problem
It relates to the two-party system, not whether the U.S. is an oligarchy.
The article implies that the U.S. is not a democracy, but oligarchy and democracy aren't mutually exclusive. I'd say the U.S. (and most Western countries) is both and always has been. Voters certainly have influence in the U.S. but it's limited, just like everywhere else.
Re: The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
#38We hear a lot about what is or isn't a democracy but the reality is that very few countries today would ever be above the bar set. Even Athenian democracy wouldn't, as it was a demos of the male citizens only, supported by a large slave class. What is more important is: is it working? And if not, why not?
> What is more important is: is it working? And if not, why not?
It's always “working”, the question is for whom.
Re: The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's been obvious to anyone who pays attention to all the details and thinks hard about their meaning, but that is a small fraction of people.
I think that deep down many people often believe that they could have a say in policy if only they tried hard enough, so their lack of influence is a kind of personal failing. In reality these systems are designed to absorb your effort and direct it into time sinks that either serve those in power Want to change things? First "we" need to take back the house by phone-banking for this blue dog Chip in $5 today to help…
These things do help but only very slightly, not sufficiently. The main function of a protest is not to effect change, but to help people who support a cause meet each other. Voting for one party can be better than voting for the other party even if both parties are bad in different ways.
Re: The US is not a democracy but an oligarchy, study concludes (2014)
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is why, instead of "democracy", it's more useful to quantify democratic . One traditional measure of such is the degree to which political power can be gained through free elections. But the research in TFA instead uses a novel measure: the weight a population has in its country's policymaking. Which yields fascinating results. Because, per the linked research, in present-time USA that weight is ~zero. Which is…
The linked research was 12 years ago during the Obama regime. Have things changed since Obama?
The research covered policies from 1981 to 2002.