In one of the rare threads I start... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...acy-a-new-study-warns/?utm_term=.15e0050dd862 The government of the United States got a downgrade this week: We're no longer a “full democracy,” according to the Economist Intelligence Unit's latest Democracy Index. For the first time, we were bumped down to “flawed,” thanks to an “erosion of public trust in political institutions.” According to the report's authors, a flawed democracy has free elections but “weak governance, an underdeveloped political culture and low levels of political participation.” Other countries that share this dubious honor include Italy, Japan, France and India. Rankings are based on a country's electoral process, civil liberties, the functioning of government, political participation and political culture. That downgrade puts us at 21 in the rankings. Norway, Iceland and Sweden were ranked as the world's most vibrant democracies, followed by New Zealand and Denmark; Canada and Ireland tied for sixth place. Syria and North Korea came, somewhat predictably, in last. Americans are days into Donald Trump's presidency and just a couple of months out from one of the most divisive elections in history. But the report caution that our problems go back much further. The country has been “teetering on the brink” for years, the report says. Faith in our public institutions — including Congress, newspapers and banks — has been in decline for decades. Just 19 percent of Americans trust the government most of the time. Three-quarters believe that most elected officials put their own interests ahead of the country. “Trust in political institutions is an essential component of well-functioning democracies. Yet surveys by Pew, Gallup and other polling agencies have confirmed that public confidence in government has slumped to historic lows in the U.S. This has had a corrosive effect on the quality of democracy,” the report found. This has created a “legitimacy crisis,” the report says. The United States is in good company. Democracy is looking sickly the world over.
Faith in our public institutions — including Congress, newspapers and banks — has been in decline for decades. Just 19 percent of Americans trust the government most of the time. Three-quarters believe that most elected officials put their own interests ahead of the country.
I'm not interested in either party wanting to "take the country back" or "fighting for you" (fight? LOL). This is the mess they've made already. Why will more of the same is going to work?
I'll say the same thing in this thread that I said yesterday when @Rastapopoulos posted this story. The notion that people's feelings about the government determine the "fullness" of a nation's democratic system is ridiculous. People being so disillusioned that they choose not to vote doesn't make America any less of a democracy; it makes those people apathetic idiots who refuse to participate in the system. America is as much of a democracy as it ever was. Which is...somewhat of one.
A vibrant democracy is one that the people believe in and trust. Not showing up to vote is a vote in its own right. Big government isn't the answer, or people would be happy with it. And politicians wouldn't be profiting from it. Trickle down government is a miserable failure, too. The past 8 years saw people's real spending power decreased and many went on "disability@ and food stamps. More of the same lost the election. Yes we can lost the election.
NYTimes , of all sources, gets this right. An honest and trustworthy 4th estate is a requirement for a vibrant democracy. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/...r=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/?state=nwa Consider how far CNN departed from this model in the last election. Even though CNN has many able journalists prepared to report stories and talk to voters in communities across the country, its programs were dominated by pundits in Washington and New York squabbling over tweets and polls. From a journalistic perspective, this model poses real problems. Surrogates are held to a different standard from reporters and often given airtime even when they’ve proven to be reckless with the truth. CNN’s expert input is often of questionable value, as evidenced by the panel last Saturday night, which at one point consisted of one woman and eight men discussing the Women’s March. But from CNN’s perspective, a pundits-on-panels model offers several benefits. To start with, it’s cost effective. On-the-ground reporting requires expensive crews, satellite trucks and travel. With far less effort, news executives can present polarized, high-drama debates that spike viewers’ outrage and short-term ratings. Most of that recent drama was centered on Donald J. Trump, who, during the early months of the campaign, got coverage from CNN that dwarfed that of the other 16 Republican contenders. All this was about one thing, and it’s not better journalism. It’s bigger profits. Insiders have reported that CNN made more than $1 billion gross profit in 2016, at least $100 million more than the company projected. While CNN made its numbers, it missed the story. After the election, CNN’s own media critic, Brian Stelter, rightly told the audience, “Some of you watching right now are having a very hard time trusting this channel.” And yet Time Warner’s chief executive declared 2016 a “killer year” for CNN.
I just searched facebook for that group, didn't find the group, just people complaining about the group. Fake outrage?
It's a classification, not an accurate description of our government. According to the report's authors, a flawed democracy has free elections but “weak governance, an underdeveloped political culture and low levels of political participation.” Other countries that share this dubious honor include Italy, Japan, France and India. Rankings are based on a country's electoral process, civil liberties, the functioning of government, political participation and political culture.
