The U.S. is now a "backsliding democracy"

[pecksniff]

According to the think tank International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.

"This year we coded the United States as backsliding for the first time, but our data suggest that the backsliding episode began at least in 2019," it said in its report titled "Global State of Democracy 2021."

"The United States is a high-performing democracy, and even improved its performance in indicators of impartial administration (corruption and predictable enforcement) in 2020. However, the declines in civil liberties and checks on government indicate that there are serious problems with the fundamentals of democracy," Alexander Hudson, a co-author of the report, told AFP.

"A historic turning point came in 2020-21 when former president Donald Trump questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 election results in the United States," the report said.

In addition, Hudson pointed to a "decline in the quality of freedom of association and assembly during the summer of protests in 2020" following the police killing of George Floyd.

International IDEA bases its assessments on 50 years of democratic indicators in around 160 countries, assigning them to three categories: democracies (including those that are "backsliding"), "hybrid" governments and authoritarian regimes.

"The visible deterioration of democracy in the United States, as seen in the increasing tendency to contest credible election results, the efforts to suppress participation (in elections), and the runaway polarization... is one of the most concerning developments," said International IDEA secretary-general Kevin Casas-Zamora.

This is after the Economist Intelligence Unit downgraded the U.S. to a "flawed democracy" in 2017.

Now, that's all the doing of one side -- and it ain't the Democrats. Bothsidesism does not apply here.

 

[Cubantripod]

Covid restrictions have nothing to do with it.

https://reason.com/2021/11/23/covid...uthoritarian-and-authoritarianism-even-worse/

 

[pecksniff]

https://reason.com/2021/11/23/covid...uthoritarian-and-authoritarianism-even-worse/

That's Reason. Not to be taken seriously.

 

[Cubantripod]

That's Reason. Not to be taken seriously.

Logical fallacy. The article cites additional areas not mentioned in the article that you cited that were considered in the determination of what countries are a backsliding democracy. You not liking a libertarian viewpoint does not invalidate the article.

 

[pecksniff]

Logical fallacy. The article cites additional areas not mentioned in the article that you cited that were considered in the determination of what countries are a backsliding democracy. You not liking a libertarian viewpoint does not invalidate the article.

It is about rising authoritarianism, not backsliding democracy. Authoritarian is the opposite of libertarian, but it is not the opposite of democratic. Is there anything in there about disease-containment measures leading to dishonest or discredited elections?

 

[Cubantripod]

It is about rising authoritarianism, not backsliding democracy. Authoritarian is the opposite of libertarian, but it is not the opposite of democratic. Is there anything in their about disease-containment measures leading to dishonest or discredited elections?

Covid measures as well as Donald Trump questioning are both part of the slide towards authoritarianism. From your own article "[t]he pandemic has certainly accelerated and magnified some of the negative trends, particularly in places where democracy and the rule of law were ailing before the pandemic," Casas-Zamora said.

 

[pecksniff]

Covid measures as well as Donald Trump questioning . . .

Questioning by him, or of him?

 

[Cubantripod]

Questioning by him, or of him?

By him. Trump questioning the result of the election.

 

[oggbashan]

I think the report in the OP is overstated. The fact that politicians and electoral officials are currently discussing how to make democracy work better (and each side has a different definition of 'better') is a sign that democracy is alive and well in America.

 

[Cubantripod]

I think the report in the OP is overstated. The fact that politicians and electoral officials are currently discussing how to make democracy work better (and each side has a different definition of 'better') is a sign that democracy is alive and well in America.

I think you're too optimistic. Neither side really cares about democracy. They only care about power. That's why they've created a duopoly. They've made it almost impossible for a third party to have a chance at being successful.

 

[pecksniff]

I think you're too optimistic. Neither side really cares about democracy. They only care about power. That's why they've created a duopoly. They've made it almost impossible for a third party to have a chance at being successful.

I think a multiparty system would be better than a two-party system -- that's why I'm always beating the drum for proportional representation -- but that doesn't mean a two-party system can't be democratic.

 

[oggbashan]

I think a multiparty system would be better than a two-party system -- that's why I'm always beating the drum for proportional representation -- but that doesn't mean a two-party system can't be democratic.

There are several variants of proportional representation. Most mean that a coalition government is the result. Some European democracies function fairly well with a coalition. Some don't and coalitions can fall apart like Sweden that had a Prime Minister this week for only seven hours. And Belgium is as divided as the US and has struggled to form a government several times, leaving the country to be run by civil servants for many months.

 

[pecksniff]

There are several variants of proportional representation. Most mean that a coalition government is the result.

"Coalition government" is only necessary in a country that combines PR with a parliamentary system, i.e., the legislature elects the executive. It would not be a problem in the U.S., where, at both the federal and state levels, we have a separation-of-powers system with a separately elected executive -- no need for a legislature to put together a coalition that can "form a government." If we had PR here, any "coalition" would be issue-specific -- e.g., the Greens and Libertarians and Socialists would all join forces to legalize marijuana, but not when it came to single-payer health care.

 

[BidudeinWi]

No, you're a Democracy.

Argue the form of Democracy, sure, but in the end, when you whittle down every possible form a Government can take, you end up at three.

Democracy, Monarchy and Dictatorship.

Those three are the choices, and the US is what form of government if you only have the three choices?

Says the fucktard who bows down to a diaper shitting, wrinkled old bag! The U. S. Is a Representative Republic. Big difference. In a “democracy” the majority rules. Not the case here.

Stay in your lane, bro!

 

[Cubantripod]

I think a multiparty system would be better than a two-party system -- that's why I'm always beating the drum for proportional representation -- but that doesn't mean a two-party system can't be democratic.

When you're being forced to pick between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum and so many people are crying for something different I would beg to say it is not very democratic. They just point the finger at the other side and ride the wave of momentum by the angry voter. The last significant piece of legislation we passed was the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The only reason we passed that is because the riots that ensued after the death of MLK was enough to break the filibuster from the Dixiecrats.

 

[pecksniff]

The last significant piece of legislation we passed was . . .

. . . the ACA.