this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
33 points (100.0% liked)

News

31375 readers
2403 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Oh, but were not a democracy, were a constitutional republic hardy har har har har

  • my republican friends.
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

constitutional republic

So we're going to follow the constitution?

ohh

It's like talking to MAGA about Christianity So you're going to follow the bible?

ohh

[–] ObtuseDoorFrame@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I wish I could award this comment. It follows my occasional and unfulfilling conversations with Republicans extremely closely. If the conversation doesn't end with wanting to pull my hair out and put my head through the nearest available drywall, did I really talk to Republican?

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

we're a constitutional federal republic, with democratically elected representatives, but a plutocracy, in practice

  • me, a political science pedant of highest/worst order
[–] FilthyHookerSpit@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'd like to subscribe to more political pedantry

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago

FilthyHookerSpit

Discount for you, but on one condition:

You gotta spit on all of my tankie "friends" over at lemmy.ml, hexbear, and lemmygrad and say, "This service was prepaid, and I made a handsome profit, ultimately at your expense and exploitation."

[–] Deathray5@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

"me, a political science pedant of highest/worst order"

Yo you single

spoilerSorry just funiest response I could think of

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago

Suprisingly to everyone, happily married, brah.

[–] Astra@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

As a political science pedant, can you explain to me the difference between a democracy and a constitutional republic? I tried to Google "constitutional republic" but I just got a Wikipedia page that said they were the same thing.

Which I guess would fit, since republicans are absolute dumbfucks, but if there's actually some nuance there, I'm curious to know.

Thanks!

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

If the question is "What's the difference?", then, as is tradition, we must figuratively clear our throats before such discourse with the well-worn adage, "It depends."

As a disclaimer, much of this content was copied from Wikipedia and arranged in a way to support my opinion; none of this should be taken as Gospel. This is not financial advice. And please accept my apologies for the tedious length.

If we limit our terms' definitions to their etymological roots, then:

Democracy

  • The term democracy first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens during classical antiquity. The word comes from dêmos '(common) people' and krátos 'force/might'.

  • In a direct democracy, the people have the direct authority to deliberate and decide legislation. In a representative democracy, the people choose governing officials through elections to do so. The definition of "the people" and the ways authority is shared among them or delegated by them have changed over time and at varying rates in different countries.

Republic

  • The term originates from the Latin translation of Greek word politeia. Cicero, among other Latin writers, translated politeia into Latin as res publica, and it was in turn translated by Renaissance scholars as republic (or similar terms in various European languages). The term can literally be translated as 'public matter'. It was used by Roman writers to refer to the state and government, even during the period of the Roman Empire. The term politeia can be translated as form of government, polity, or regime, and it does not necessarily imply any specific type of regime as the modern word republic sometimes does.

  • A republic, based on the Latin phrase res publica ('public affair' or 'people's affair'), is a state in which political power rests with the public (people) through their representatives—in contrast to a monarchy. Although a republic is most often a single sovereign state, subnational state entities that have governments that are republican in nature may be referred to as republics.

  • Representation in a republic may or may not be freely elected by the general citizenry. In many historical republics, representation has been based on personal status and the role of elections has been limited. This remains true today; among the 159 states that use republic in their official names as of 2017, and other states formally constituted as republics, are states that narrowly constrain both the right of representation and the process of election.

  • The term developed its modern meaning in reference to the constitution of the ancient Roman Republic, lasting from the overthrow of the kings in 509 BC to the establishment of the Empire in 27 BC. This constitution was characterized by a Senate composed of wealthy aristocrats wielding significant influence; several popular assemblies of all free citizens, possessing the power to elect magistrates from the populace and pass laws; and a series of magistracies with varying types of civil and political authority.

Plutocracy

  • A plutocracy (from Ancient Greek πλοῦτος (ploûtos) 'wealth' and κράτος (krátos) 'power') or plutarchy is a society that is ruled or controlled by people of great wealth or income. The first known use of the term in English dates from 1631. Unlike most political systems, plutocracy is not rooted in any established political philosophy.

  • Some modern historians, politicians, and economists argue that the U.S. was effectively plutocratic for at least part of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era periods between the end of the Civil War until the beginning of the Great Depression. 

  • President Theodore Roosevelt became known as the "trust-buster" for his aggressive use of antitrust law, through which he managed to break up such major combinations as the largest railroad and Standard Oil, the largest oil company. According to historian David Burton, "When it came to domestic political concerns, TR's bête noire was the plutocracy." In his autobiographical account of taking on monopolistic corporations as president, Roosevelt recounted:

...we had come to the stage where for our people what was needed was a real democracy; and of all forms of tyranny the least attractive and the most vulgar is the tyranny of mere wealth, the tyranny of a plutocracy.

On paper, we (the U.S.) are a not a direct democracy, though we do vote directly about some issues via referendums; our constitution codifies the extents and limitations of legislation, enforcement, and jurisprudence of our laws and our rights as citizens.

We directly elect representatives to carry out the business of governance from local, state, to the federal level as our country's political union is a federation of States that simultaneously retain their autonomy via the parameters outlined within the constitution and cede ultimate authority of jurisprudence to our bicameral national assembly (in our case, Congress) and Supreme Court.

In practice, due to regulatory capture, political expedience and corruption, and the realities of our global economic expansion, our country is effectively ruled by 2 factions of a political class of wealth that use faux-populism to maintain their power and influence.

[–] low_stars@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It lost that status a long time ago. We keep the veneer of it intact, though.

[–] LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Most of the "Democracy" status countries are bull shit anyway. They are heavily weighed on "Economic Freedom" which is a fancy way of saying the freedom for which Imperialist nations corporations are able to exploit third world countries resources.

Nationalize your oil system and have the profits of it go directly back to your people for the improvement of social programs? Damn, that sounds like Communism!

Sell oil drilling rights to Shell to "bring jobs" to your country that pay poverty wages, destroy local ecosystems, and extract all your resources with no benefits to the local population? Well, that's "Economic Freedom" baby!

[–] Corgana@startrek.website 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

First of all, that's not what "Economic Freedom" means in the context of democracy, but more importantly "economic freedom" is not even a factor in the methodology used by the group this article is citing.

[–] LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I wasn't referencing the article I was speaking more generally on things like "Democracy Index" or others that care more about a country having unregulated free markets than they do about citizens having healthcare. This is often what these "democracy" surveys refer to as Economic Freedom. You can pretend it's how they act like it's defined like "oh the government can't tell you what business you can run as a poor mom and pop shop". But in reality it's the biggest players that benefit from unregulated markets on a global scale.

It's why a capitalist hellhole like Argentina is considered a "flawed democracy" and Cuba is considered "Authoritarian". It's just neoliberal bull shit.

[–] Crikeste@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

We should have never had the status given we still use slaves.

[–] ksigley@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Having a for-profit prison system was a bad choice.

Who could have seen it coming ?

[–] Ilixtze@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago

And a pay to win political candidate system, and a heavily monetized educational system. Who is surprised about the decline of the man who steps on his dick and machineguns his own foot?

[–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Land of the free founded on slaves. America really is just a big pile of hypocrisy under the hood of vain surface level patriotism.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago (5 children)

America deserves to be recognized as a Third World Country. I say this as an American, it's deplorable how the citizens are treated.

[–] Corgana@startrek.website 4 points 4 months ago

To be clear- this is just your personal "vibe" and not an actual fact, because the term "third world country" literally means a country that is not aligned with the US or USSR. If you meant "developing nation" that term also has a definition the US does not meet.

[–] LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

I think the term is "A third world country with a Gucci belt"

[–] eldain@feddit.nl 2 points 4 months ago

The cold war is over, they are called developing countries now. Your point still stands, the US has lots of developing to do, especially on the social/society front.

[–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

South Sudan is a third world country. America isnt third world, it's heading into authoritarianism.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

We've been a third world country for a several decades already. Just because we use to change out guys in the office every 4-8 years, doesnt mean it was ever all that good here.

[–] Allonzee@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

We haven't had a vote on the shape or priorities of our economy since 1980. This is an economic dictatorship, and has been longer than most of us here have been alive.

We just get a vote on how/if to address the social wedge symptoms that economy either causes or exacerbates.

And only IF addressing them won't meaningfully harm quarterly earnings expectations for our sociopath class. Example: you know what would drastically reduce the number of abortions without any kind of ban? A living wage that can support a family. But that would cut into corporate metastasis and is therefore a non-starter by either party in anything more than rhetoric.

You can have scapegoating(R) or affirmation ribbons(D), so long as you vote for for profit prisons, legal murder for profit, millions of Americans dying of exposure on the streets, crumbling commons, public education in utter ruin.... Freedom!

[–] Ilixtze@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

New banana republic just dropped!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] liverbe@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

"You’ve only been a democracy for only 50 years. Not unless you don't count black people... you are nearly as mature democracy as Botswana." - Lukas Matsson (Swedish guy) on Succession

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

Could? Lmao. Don't you need laws and elected officials to count as a democracy to begin with?

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 months ago (8 children)

The US is one of the most watered down democracies, even for a liberal democracy (which is severely watered down). Its a system where the needs of the many are filtered through the needs of the few. We dont need to "fix" liberal democracy, we need workers democracy (syndicalism).

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

And a few days after that, PragerU releases a video titled "Why democracies will fail eventually", which tells its viewers that democracy creates "moral decadence", and now a "strong leader" is needed to fix the issue, who might have told some noble lies like a parent tells their kid the stork brings the children when they're not ready for reality. And the video ends with a "Roman salute" over "God Bless America".

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 1 points 4 months ago (4 children)

People tell their kids the stork brings babies because the parent is the one not ready to have the conversation.

The parent is avoiding their own humiliation. Telling kids how babies are made is not embarassing for kids. Kids have no reason to feel shame or judgement about these kinds of things….

Just pointing this out to show that the metaphor here is deeply flawed.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] peaceful_world_view@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Could? ....should.

[–] iamunfuckwitable@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)
[–] wanderwisley@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

Probably won’t get it back

[–] blade_barrier@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 months ago (3 children)
  1. Democracy isn't a status given by some watchdog.
  2. Democracy is shit
[–] snugglesthefalse@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago

So you're all for dictatorships then?

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 4 months ago

What do you mean by that?

  • Do you mean electoral politics is fundamentally flawed?
  • Do you mean direct action by the working class (workers democracy) is better than liberalism?
  • Or are you just begging to have the orange tyrants foot deep down your throat?
[–] ammonium@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Anything else than democracy is shittier

[–] blade_barrier@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 months ago (18 children)
load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›