What is your line in the sand?

Edit: thank you all for your responses. I think it’s important as an American we take your view points seriously. I think of a North Korean living inside of North Korea. They don’t really know how bad it is because that is all hidden from them and they’ve never had anything else. As things get worse for Americans it’s important to have your voices because we will become more and more isolated.

Even the guy who said, “lol.” Some people need that sort of sobering reaction.

  • DasFaultier@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    See, as a German, when I see a country go down the same route as the Weimar Republic after handing over the power to the Nazi party, I think it’s just very obvious. Hitler took some two months to completely destroy democracy, and the US are juuust in the middle of that. History doesn’t repeat, but sometimes it rhymes, and the similarities are just remarkable.

    So yeah, I guess that would be a big fat trench in the sand.

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    30 days ago

    It’s what they call a “flawed democracy” now. It’s not at the point where thousands of people simply disappear and every aspect of political life is dictated by one party’s leadership.
    But it’s sliding downward.

  • Bloomcole@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    Never have, they are ruled by their uniparty and indeed they can’t see outside their box.
    I am probably that lol guy.

  • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Democracy is an umbrella term. These are the types of democracy the US is:

    1. Representative Democracy

    2. Constitutional Democracy

    3. Presidential Democracy

    4. Liberal Democracy

    Types of Democracy the US is not:

    1. Direct Democracy

    2. Parliamentary Democracy

    3. Illiberal Democracy

    4. Participatory Democracy

    5. Social Democracy

    So yes, it’s a democracy.

    • yata@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      You are confusing a lot of pol science terms, as well as using some which aren’t part of pol science at all.

      All modern democracies are representative democracies, as in voters votes for representatives to represent them. Switzerland has elements of direct democracy, but on a foundation of representative democracy as well. Constitutional, presidential and liberal democracy are not an actual meaningful terms in political science.

      Technically the US is a representative democracy, but I am pretty sure OPs is asking about the practice of the thing. And the practice is very different from the written word about how it was supposed to be, especially this recent presidential term.

      • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I didn’t confuse anything, this isn’t a pol sci class, so I don’t care what is or is not considered a pol sci term. Yes, they are mixed and some are subtypes of others

  • Freewheel@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    First off, I’m an American. Born a stone’s throw from the location of one of the critical events in the history of the American revolution.

    To answer the question, no. Leaving aside the whole Republic versus democracy argument, my point of realization was when one party seized upon a minor technical issue and disenfranchised countless voters via lawsuit, sufficient to allow the race to be called in their favor.

    I’m sure there are many readers who believe I’m talking about 2016. For those readers, your keyword search is “hanging Chad”.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    To me it never really was. If you look into how they do voting here, its insane, really.

    US citizens always loved to make these “we’ll bomb some democracy in to you” but they never brought democracy either. I think it’s fair to say that no other country started asa y dictatorships as the US has

    Add to that;

    Bush lost the election and became president anyway.

    Trump has heen successfully lying his way through the past four years (and well, yeah the 4 years before that too) instigated an insurrection and was never held accountable

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        28 days ago

        I am outside the US, not a citizen, just someone whose life constantly seems to be affected by shitty US politics

  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Not when they have the Electoral College bullshit upending every election in favor of a minority.

      • Lemminary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Well, it takes a bigger portion of voters voting blue just to reach equilibrium, which then results in a few swing states because that’s the stupid system they have. The whole purpose is to dilute the blue vote so Republicans can have a coin flip chance. So whoever wins the swing states instead of the popular vote wins the election. One example is Trump vs Clinton. Technically, Clinton won the popular vote but not the electorate.


        Source

        So, really, it’s not “why are Dems winning elections?” but “why are Reps winning them at all?”

        • Lumbardo@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          In the case of this election. The Republicans won the popular vote, so by your logic they should have won this year anyways.

          Even so, if you look at voting distribution on a US map. Densely populated urban centers vote blue and there are large swathes of land that vote red. Do you propose that the people who live in these densely populated areas should have the power to choose the president every election?

          In my view, the fact that the elections are close and both parties win is evidence that the system works.

          • Lemminary@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            by your logic they should have won this year anyways

            They had a higher probability of winning and they took full advantage of that, yes.

            Do you propose that the people who live in these densely populated areas should have the power to choose the president every election?

            Yes. That’s how it’s done in all other modern democracies that I know of including my own. I don’t understand this idea that population density must result in devaluing one’s vote. It’s punishing the cities for existing. That just because you live in the city your power should be diminished because other people chose to live in Bumbuck, Iowa. Like, what does your residence have to do with anything? It’s a foreign concept to me. Like, you’re not even hurting, you’re just upset that your views aren’t those of the nation.

            Not to mention that’s a curious mindset to have. It implies that people in the city can’t be trusted to decide an election despite their candidates being great. Coincidentally, most of the people in the cities are POC and I find that to be more than a coincidence. I’m inclined to think it’s yet another tool used to disenfranchise Black voters and suppress minorities given the US’s notoriously racist history. We even got threads on this site expressing how that fixation on race makes us foreigners uncomfortable.

            is evidence that the system works

            Yes, it works great in favor of Republicans by tipping the scale. I’m surprised you replied with that given how I just explained that it’s a rigged system and you said, yes it’s wonderful…

            • Lumbardo@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              What you are proposing gives complete power of the elections to small spheres of influence in the US. Candidates only have to appease to people who live in the cities to win. I don’t see how this can be seen as a good thing. The current system forces candidates to get both the rural and urban residents’ votes to win.

              • Lemminary@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                The current system forces the candidates to appeal to a number of states artificially. How is that any better? Lol It doesn’t even do what you claim it does.

                And also, most of those red areas on the map are empty, as you said. Why bother saying it’s empty when it’s convenient only to present a fully red map as if it means anything?

                Lastly, cite your sources, please. We have no idea where you got that image.

                • Lumbardo@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Are you referring to the swing states? They have to appeal to those states because they already have the other states locked in, but they can’t just ignore the places they usually get votes each election either. Part of the reason the Republicans won the popular vote this year is because many counties flipped from Democrat to Republican. They aren’t appealing to swing states artificially, they are trying to win the votes of a population that votes either direction and isn’t practically a guarantee.

                  Those red areas are in fact not empty, there are people who live in those regions. That map was made by a redditor here : https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/s/6914AUEoEf. When I initially saw the post (a few years ago), I verified the information presented at that time. You are of course free to double check.

  • jaxxed@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It is still a democracy, but that democracy is in crisis. You will know over the next 2/years if it will survive, although the next federal election will be the real test.

    • if the judicial and congress still share power,
    • if elections are still fair.

    Democracies can recover if they keep their representation.

    • silly goose meekah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Elections in the US aren’t really all that fair TBH.

      Researchers at the Brookings Institution agree that the strategic manipulation of our electoral process is largely to blame for the erosion of US democracy in recent years. Brookings says this manipulation takes various forms: the intentional addition of administrative barriers to voting, unfairly drawing electoral maps, the subversion of the election certification and counting process, and the violent coup attempt on January 6, 2021.

      https://blog.ucs.org/liza-gordon-rogers/us-elections-arent-as-free-and-fair-as-they-should-be-heres-how-science-can-help/

      The United States is experiencing two major forms of democratic erosion in its governing institutions:

      • Strategic manipulation of elections. Distinct from “voter fraud,” which is almost non-existent in the United States, election manipulation has become increasingly common and increasingly extreme. Examples include election procedures that make it harder to vote (like inadequate polling facilities) or that reduce the opposing party’s representation (like gerrymandering).
      • Executive aggrandizement. Even a legitimately elected leader can undermine democracy if they eliminate governmental “checks and balances” or consolidate power in unaccountable institutions. The United States has seen substantial expansions of executive power and serious efforts to erode the independence of the civil service. In addition, there are serious questions about the impartiality of the judiciary.

      https://www.brookings.edu/articles/understanding-democratic-decline-in-the-united-states/

      • ButtermilkBiscuit@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        One thing that I think they may have missed in this analysis is erosion from the inside. Our supreme Court overturned or instituted a couple major rules that have allowed corporations to funnel billions of dollars directly to politicians with citizens united decision, then helped erode administrative functions of government by overturning Chevron deference. When you combine that shit with the way we allow corporate lobbying in the US, we’re not even close to “democracy” in this shit hole. It’s a corporate oligarchy masquerading as a republic/democracy. Corporations own this country, the government protects them, that bullshit you hear about the “land of the free” is about corporations not individuals.

  • Sem@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    The answer depends of the reference point. I was born in Russia (I’m living abroad from 2022) and compared to the putin’s dictatorship US is a democracy. You guys still have a freedom of speech, not fake opposition to Trump and independent courts. From the other side, most of the countries are democracies if compared to Russia…