> 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.

▲

juleiie a day ago | parent [-]

System B In America wouldn’t be better at all. It would be corrupt corporate authoritarian tendency becoming an established reality. It is not yet a reality. You should work to restore democracy not fantasize about falling deeper into authoritarian pit.

I don’t get you people. You whine about authoritarian tendencies of Trump and then you say that maybe an authoritarian system is better and you want authoritarian system? This is just insanity

That makes me think all these comments are just propaganda double speak

▲

Matl 19 hours ago | parent [-]

I am not American and you have misunderstood my point.

The point is that if you want to have the privileges of a global hegemon and go around the world and accuse others of being authoritarian governments i.e. China, then your shit better be close to exemplary counter to that. Otherwise people around the world might run out of patience with your shit.

Looking at both countries and what system the majority of the world would increasingly rather live under, IMO it would be option b.) not because they love authoritarianism, but because they want to live well and be as free as possible while doing so.

The US is increasingly authoritarian, (in China you may not be able to criticize Xi, in the US you cannot criticize Israel without consequences).

There's multiple ways one can be 'free'. The US seems to define freedom only in the narrow sense of being free from overt oppression for political opinions, but for many being free from economic insecurity is at least as, if not more, of an important freedom. The US does not offer that second freedom, but increasingly not even the first one.

In light of that, why should the people of the world tolerate US hegemony and not increasingly turn towards China?

▲

juleiie 13 hours ago | parent [-]

Wait so America is getting increasingly authoritarian and you are afraid of authoritarianism so you chose option B - Authoritarianism

Make it make sense

“ In China, criticizing the central government or Xi Jinping can result in forced disappearances, total digital erasure, arbitrary detention, and severe legal prosecution by a judicial system controlled entirely by the ruling party.”

I don’t like this, I don’t like that option B at all. I got an allergy to detention camps

▲

Matl 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> Wait so America is getting increasingly authoritarian and you are afraid of authoritarianism so you chose option B - Authoritarianism

> Make it make sense

If Option A is a country that pretends is a democracy, but in reality is an oligarchy where you don't get taken care of if you're sick, has crappy infrastructure, most people can't afford a family or a vacation AND you increasingly can't express your opinion and Option B is a country where you can't openly express your opinion, but most of the other things I mentioned you CAN afford, then many people would go for option B, because with option A they likely can't express themselves anyway and CANNOT do things they can with option B.

There's no simpler way to dumb this down for you.

The point is not 'we love authoritarianism', but that America ONLY has the democracy claim going for it and NOT MUCH ELSE, therefore the democracy it has better be near perfect for that to be a compelling argument.

And it is far from that.

What I find frustrating with discussions like these is that many Americans seem content with the claim that America is a democracy without examining the reality, meaning the chance for improvement there is slim.

	▲	0xDEAFBEAD 8 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		>What I find frustrating with discussions like these is that many Americans seem content with the claim that America is a democracy without examining the reality, meaning the chance for improvement there is slim. Well it's not just the Americans claiming that America is a democracy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_Democracy_Index Your idea of what the US is like seems to be a mosaic of viral clickbait loosely tethered to reality