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.

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour 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.

  • qnvx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Sure, though the developments are worrying. If Donald gets a third term, I will consider USA an autocracy.

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    No, because I’m sure it’s passed the tipping point towards autocracy. There’s endless different forms of both it and democracy, but it’s always true that democracy begets democracy and autocracy begets autocracy, so that’s my “line in the sand”.

    In America’s case as of now, all the checks and balances that used to work are still there, but they’ve been questionable for many years and aren’t going to do anything going forwards, so they’re functionally more like Canada’s monarchy.

    If you’re looking for a perspective on what’s normal and what’s not, consider that when there’s a big social problem in Canada, it’s only a matter of time until a law trying to address it gets passed. That’s what a functioning democracy is like. Meanwhile, there’s been a known place in the US where no courts have jurisdiction to prosecute serious crimes for two decades now.

  • comfy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    The amount of voter suppression, the broken FPTP system and mass media influence over the US electoral system, means that for all intents and purposes, the USA federal election is just picking your favourite of the two viable owning-class-endorsed candidates. “The people” never had a realistic chance of representation or empowerment. This is not a new critique, it’s been discussed for at least a century and a half.

    There is simply no real value in calling the USA a democracy at any point during our lifetimes, regardless of whether you are allowed to vote or even write-in candidates, regardless of the two-party system, because the power imbalance between the working class and the owning class surrounding that vote makes it as much a sham election as Russia’s sham elections. But even compared to other (until recently) close allies, the US implementation of federal voting has long been an absolute circus.

    • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      It hasn’t been a democracy since it had the ‘electoral college’ and unequal representation. So, forever…

      But within the context of the previous status quo - I’d say it stopped being a democracy exactly when Trump was allowed to be a candidate for the presidency after the Jan 6 coup attempt, and parallel attempts to invent votes and pressure states to lie about their vote counts. Which was blatantly unconstitutional and illegal. More than enough evidence to bar him from being a candidate, and yet the senate allowed it to proceed - that was the end.

      • Lemminary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days 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
          0
          ·
          2 days 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
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day 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
              ·
              24 hours 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
                23 hours 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
                  ·
                  22 hours 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.

  • Thymos@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    One interesting thing I haven’t read here yet (haven’t read all the comments though) is religion. Sure, officially there’s separation of church and state, but Christianity is everywhere in your country, including government. The amount of times I’ve heard “God bless the United States” being said is ridiculous. To me, that’s undemocratic and I would feel very uncomfortable with that as an atheist.

    • Lumbardo@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Of course you would be uncomfortable with that because you’re an atheist… You’re an atheist. The US has freedom of religion, this freedom also applies to government officials.

  • Kuranashi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    For a long while I thought America was a democracy but that the population was rather uneducated. Their media and culture seemed to glorify ignorance and shame intellectualism.

    I now consider America a fascist state, early stages. I’ve seen too many simulations to know that the level of organized resistance required to prevent the descent into fascism is either too morally grey or too risky to be worth it. It must get much worse before resistance is meaningful.

    At best an American is a victim, at worst they are a fascist.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Resistance to early fascism is not morally grey or too risky.

      Whether it’s effective when 90% of the population is made of shallow, consumerized brainlets is another question.

  • lietuva@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    American political system can very easily produce a new authoritarian leader, the president has much more power and with Congress majority can easily turn things around. The fact it hasn’t happened before is a great achievement. Looking at everything Trump administration has been doing is to concentrate power at the top and to become new dictatorship. It wont be Trump, maybe JD Vance who knows.

    It depends on what the Americans will allow to happen, cause I feel that Americans are getting pissed harder each year and many large protests will happen. Is it going to be a wakeup call to become democratic and sensible again or full dictatorship only time will tell.

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    People seem to think freedom and democracy are synonymous. Places can be free, but not have democracy; places can also have democracy and not be free. When a simple majority of the voting public supports cracking down on freedoms - you will have one of the two, but you can’t have both.

  • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    We are mostly a democracy but it’s crumbling. Trump has ignored judges and stuff and causing a real shit fest. But for the most part, the people elected for this. Now if the people get their heads out of the asses and vote this guy out, but he’s still president, then it’s not a democracy.

    • Lumbardo@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Why should all the densely populated urban centers be the only people with control over the federal election?

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days 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