• The Economist Intelligence Unit has released the Democracy Index 2018
    30 replies, posted
The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) has just released its annual democracy index, and there are a few things that might surprise you. Australia and New Zealand are the only "full democracies" in the entire Asia-Pacific region, while the United States is among those that couldn't find its way into the top category. There are also eight countries (Algeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Timor-Leste, Ethiopia, North Korea, Laos, Nepal and Sri Lanka) whose full titles include the word "democratic", but the EIU says not one of these countries is actually fully democratic. To rank the countries the EIU gives a score out of 10 for a number of categories, such as political participation and the functioning of government, then classifies each country as either full democracy, flawed democracy, hybrid regime or authoritarian. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-10/democracy-index-economist-intelligence-unit-2018/10703184 https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/jkMCN/2/?abcnewsembedheight=550 Full whitepaper can be found at http://www.eiu.com/topic/democracy-index
Oh no, Last year the US were 7.98 (by 0.2-) in flawed democracy category for first time. And this is if continue very slowly under two-party system, there something may worse for US future.
Lmao we one above usa now pwn
The US has literally never been a very good democracy.
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/58263/8f8a5584-840e-4975-91ac-22f9538b2bcf/Annotation 2019-01-09 224539.png /smug
The downside of being one of the firsts is you don't know what works and what doesn't.
What is your obsession with railing against two party systems, lol. Several of the countries in the Full Democracy category - even within the top 10 - have prominent two-party systems.
You'd think after 242 years they'd have worked out the kinks.
problem is those 242 years werent spent trying to be a better democracy. it isnt that we didnt learn, its that people dont want it to be.
Changing a system after it's built is difficult.
Those 242 years were spent dominating the open resources, conquering Indian lands, Manifest Destiny, westward expansion, industrialization, and literally everything that is greed.
1/3 of the population supported the Confederacy, 1/3 supported segregation, 1/3 support the current president. Hard to improve when 1/3 of people aren't decent.
Maybe because yours is coming more clearly corrupted and oligarchic or plutocratic-like in every decade if we keep blinding normalized and accepting it under this form of political system than 'healthier' two-parties 'Full democratic' countries?
The US state was never meant to be particularly popular or left-wing, since that's what you mean by this. It was meant to be a good republic that had the means to expand, manage, and develop/reform a large and young society, while also remaining independent of major powers in the world. There are reasons that many inspirations for the left have largely come from elsewhere in the world.
this is a rly rly rly specific and weird thing to throw in there. i guess the irony of trump's support as a candidate not being homegrown is lost on you, huh
no, it's not. you might notice the US had the most militant labor movement in the world for a time but lacks any labor or socialist party.
it lacks a labor and socialist party because conservative capitalists keep snubbing it out. american social movements were pretty strong in the early portion of the 20th century. destroying workers and socialist movements is the thing that is american, not their non-existence. labor movements have made profound impact on our history and the effects of them continue to be felt today.
That's because they used to send in the National Guard to massacre coal miners who were on strike or the police to bust union gatherings despite the fact that the right to an assembly is completely constitutional and protected under the first amendment, all because it was simply bad for business.
k even though i have no idea why he brought it up he's not really wrong. america was literally geographically a long way from the intellectual epicenter of the labor/reform/liberal movements and a lot of those ideas only germinated here through immigrants or exiles. you're right too, of course, yeah, but the labor movement here is a decidedly detached, american version.
yeah but like. why. why is it important to anyone that labor movements got started elsewhere thats why i said it was weird and not wrong. knowing tempcon i have some ideas of why he said it
I question why the UK and Spain are so highly ranked in light of relatively recent events.
I'm surprised France is so low, I was led to believe they had quite a good system of governance.
For the matter of Spain, it’s less that Spain is a good example of a democracy, and more that most other countries have democracies which are even worse than that of Spain. As for the UK, the actual procedures and rules of the referendum were sound, and those groups which broke campaigning rules were punished accordingly. But the EIU’s Democracy Index should not be looked at as a definitive index, rather, as one indicator among many. Given that they maintain their methodology from year to year, it’s great to keep track of changes in rating of a particular country from year to year, relative to other countries, but that’s about it.
It's interesting that China (which is a one-party state, as far as I know) is actually rated as more democratic than Russia (which ostensibly has multi-party elections). The average person would likely expect the opposite, me included. Goes to show how well Russia's democratic facade works to disguise their near-fascist governance.
China has a hierarchical electoral system where representatives are elected by their constituents to local assemblies and these assemblies elect representatives to the higher assemblies and so on right up to the National People's Congress (NPC) who are elected by the assembly of the level immediately below. Delegates to the NPC are elected for five-year terms. Not all members are part of the Communist Party, there are currently 861 seats in the NPC which belong to other parties and independents.
Honestly, the UK ranking depresses me. If this is a "full democracy" then this whole democracy thing is kinda fucked. We've really got to get some better standards. Starting with reframing democracy as a constant process involving educated and willing to listen citizens, not a mad dash for power made by an elite class once every 4 years and also whenever they fucking want to reassert themselves.
This is about as good a summary of the problems we face as you can get. A highly educated populace, continuous improvements in governance and a reformation of the system which creates a political elite class.
Spain a full democracy and Portugal a flawed one? That's bullshit, how they rated that? Portugal fights corruption and social problems way better than us. Hell, they even reduced a lot their debt after implementing non-austerity measures while us keep sinking it with all the money lost on politicians.
I can get Portugal being treated with a degree of skepticism just due to their recent history. But yeah I really don't get why France and Belgium are considered flawed if Spain, Britain, and Germany aren't.
What's with the Nordic countries always doing well in these kind of rankings? Democracy, happiness, environmental friendliness, etc. - I swear the Nordics have mastered the key to the universe, except, every time someone points it out, a Nordic Facepuncher (that sounds so cool) says "Yeah, nah, it's not as good as you'd think." Is there an explanation for this?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.