| ▲ | juleiie 2 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
America is still a democracy. Its leaders may be vile today but they are bound to change. Unlike China. I cannot condemn whole nation on the basis of two elections. That’s the beauty of it all. In a democracy there are no irredeemable nations. There are just phases better or worse. China was always evil and cracked down on anyone who questioned power of highest leader. If you think you are going to convince people that somehow an authoritarian state is preferable to a western liberal democracy in any way then you are foolish. Or paid by the state. I love democracy and I love freedom. I will tirelessly work to oppose people like you until my last breath. That I swear. All the disinformation, all the propaganda will be dispersed at the iron flank of NATO. You will never have this land. Europe is my home and it is free and free will remain till I breathe. So I dare you commies, come here to Poland and try anything. We will crush you and you will see what red really looks like. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Matl a day ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> America is still a democracy. Its leaders may be vile today but they are bound to change. I disagree that it is a democracy. It's a corporatocracy and it's been for decades. But the elections are a nice PR. The Trump thing of not having a PR filter over policies that were there long before him is just making people question whether system a.) is indeed better than system b.); a.) Pseudo democracy where the will of corporations, but not people is implemented and that the people up for elections are so compromised by special interests by the time we get a choice that it doesn't matter anymore i.e. the US and most of the West. b.) A system that does away with the spectacle of national elections, with the social contract being that the leadership better be competent and peruse national interests and development, but is not directly elected i.e. China. That competency is supposed to be ensured by only allowing people who have proven competence at lower levels, (some of which they are directly elected to). There's a question about how sustainable either is. I would prefer a third option c.) where you can elect relatively competent leaders, but that doesn't seem to be an option these days. What Trump is unquestionably doing however, is making a lot of fans of the idealized system of democracy c.) think that perhaps option b.) > a.) even if less than ideal. Just because you call yourself a democracy doesn't mean you're one. Just ask citizens of the DRC. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||