according to a site called democracymatrix there are 35 countries more democratic than the us

the countries
  • Denmark
  • Norway
  • Finland
  • Sweden
  • Germany
  • Switzerland
  • Netherlands
  • New Zealand
  • Belgium
  • Costa Rica
  • Spain
  • Luxembourg
  • Australia
  • Estonia
  • Iceland
  • Ireland
  • United Kingdom
  • Austria
  • France
  • South Korea
  • Lithuania
  • Italy
  • Portugal
  • Canada
  • Japan
  • Taiwan
  • Uruguay
  • Cyprus
  • Chile
  • Slovakia
  • Greece
  • Czech Republic
  • Latvia
  • Barbados
  • Israel

  • bob_lemon@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Here’s the criteria that the score is build on.

    From a quick glance, I’d say US is majorly lacking in:

    • Equal opportunity to participate, vote: from felons bring denied voting rights to gerrymandering to Wisconsin votes being worth 4 times as much as California votes in presidential elections die to the EC, there’s a lot of fundamental issues here
    • Independence of the judiciary: the supreme court is not independent, and presidential pardons are a mockery of any justice system
    • jeffw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nobody is more free than America!!! There has to be some kind of gimmick!!! What are they doing, bribing people with basic protections and social services that counteract the crushing forces of poverty???

      • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dang straight. Freedom is having every opportunity to fall into poverty. Thats what those other countries don’t understand

        • Kit Sorens@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Freedom means nothing without rights. Every society is a “free” society to kings and billionaires, not so much for the poor. Freedoms are rights plus allowance. We allow for much in the US, but we do not universally uphold rights.

  • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Looking at the list, less a catch more a difference of ethos. Higher taxes for better public services and more even wealth distribution for social cohesion.

    Many are less diverse than the USA, which brings pros and cons too.

  • Lauchs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Do you mean “okay, but why is it still better to live on America than those places?” The answer to that one is, for the most part, it’s not. (I have lived a fairly sketchy life but the three times I’ve had guns drawn on me have all been in my brief visits to America.)

    Do you mean, how are they more democratic? Gerrymandering, unlimited campaign contributions to “PAC” which are absolutely totally not working with parties and of course, the obscenely impressive ways pork gets stuffed into the most innocuous of bills by design all come leaping to mind.

  • Nioxic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    In the US there are 2 political parties

    In Denmark theres many more. The current government is 3 parties, and theres a total of 13 iirc, currently elected parties.

    You can (most likely) find a political party to represent you.

  • Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Democracy in the US hasn’t been in a worse state in a very long time. There’s not much of a trick to having a stronger democracy than that…

  • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Speaking for NZ, while we do have things like:

    Cheap or free healthcare

    Roads in good condition

    Low corruption/Limited power

    Excellent conservation

    Great public services

    High level of safety

    Very strong employment laws

    Very low exploitation

    Very open press

    Free speech

    Almost nearly adequate climate policies

    We are still stuck with a lot of people who have the red vs blue mindset. People often vote for the party that is most likely to stop the party they don’t want getting in to power.

    We have MMP here, which is of course the best system, we have political parties across the spectrum so that the largest amount of people have representation. But goddam it’s always the same 2 in majority power.

    There’s delay in progressive change, eg decriminalizing weed, providing better health services.

    When the wrong party is in (team blue) they focus on the wrong things ie building even more roads instead of improving public transport etc.

    When the less wrong party is in (team red) they focus on appearing to do things that we care about but do a bad job.

    It’s difficult to nail down general specifics but I think you get the idea.

  • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The catch is that more democracy is not guaranteed to result in better government. But less democracy has way worse side effects.

    With a few exceptions, I’d rather be a random citizen in any of the countries on your list than in the US.

  • Granixo@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    That list seems mostly right, however…

    The UK, France and Spain ARE NOT working democracies.

    They can be considered “functioning” goverments to a degree, (and great economies no doubt).

    But those 3 countries have deep socio-political issues that their goverments should attent with outmost urgency.

    I don’t think i should describe the situation in France, as it has been spoken quite frequently in recent months.

    In the case of UK and Spain, large fractions of their populations (Ireland, Scotland and Cataluña) do not feel a partriotic sentiment towards their country as a whole, but rather the region they live in, and consider that said region should be divided into an independent nation.

    Before you dive into the negative aspects (and possible concequences) of such a division, let me remind you of the current conflict between Russia and Ucraine. In wich, Russia (or more accurately the Russian goverment) wants to claim Ucraine back as part of their territory despite most people in both countries being against that decision (and even more so about the idea of a war to resolve said conflict).

    Back to the UK and Spain, inside those countries, elections have been held to decide if their regions should split and be independent. However, said elections weren’t quite “fair” as most people in the regions that wanted to be independent did vote on favor of independence, however it was the mayority of the countries’ populations (England and the rest of Spain), that voted to keep things as they are.

    AKA People that don’t live (and probably don’t even interact with said regions) took the decision FOR THEM.

    This is specially frustrating in the case of Cataluña because they speak AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT LANGUAGE from the rest of Spain.

    So in conclusion, i believe that for those 3 countries to be considered “working democracies” their goverments should focus on the true needs of their people, rather than deciding matters on economic factors.

    • EinfachUnersetzlich@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In the case of UK and Spain, large fractions of their populations (Ireland, Scotland and Cataluña) do not feel a partriotic sentiment towards their country as a whole

      Uh, you know Ireland hasn’t been part of the UK since 1922, right?

    • EinfachUnersetzlich@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Back to the UK and Spain, inside those countries, elections have been held to decide if their regions should split and be independent. However, said elections weren’t quite “fair” as most people in the regions that wanted to be independent did vote on favor of independence, however it was the mayority of the countries’ populations (England and the rest of Spain), that voted to keep things as they are.

      Which votes are you referring to? Speaking for the UK, only the people of Scotland got a vote on their independence.

    • huojtkeg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I agree, those countries have internal problems. Said that, when they talk about democracy most of the time they are talking about freedom of speech and clean elections. When you have millions of people complaining and political parties that want the independence it proves there is a lot of freedom.

      • Granixo@feddit.cl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        As akward as it feels to say this… i think the US’s representative system would work better for these regions.

        That way, each region would have an equally valid vote, (with each individual vote still being counted and measured.)

    • charlytune@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Please back up what you’ve said here. There was a referendum on Welsh devolution, which only people in Wales voted for. There was a referendum on Scottish independence, which only people in Scotland voted for. Afaik there has never been a vote in Northern Ireland on independence / rejoining Ireland.

      The vote on Catalán independence was held by the Catalán government, voted on only in Catalonia, Spain and it’s validity was rejected by the Spanish government. And Catalonia is not the only region of Spain to have its own language, and it’s very common for multiple languages to be spoken within a country, I’m not really sure what the relevance of that is here.

  • Strayce@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What is this score based on? I had a quick skim of their site but my eyes kinda glazed over, polsci isn’t my background. Can someone ELI5?

  • angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Events in the UK, specifically tightening protest restrictions after Lizzy died and JK Rowling silencing critics through legal threats (just so you know, Trump wanted the US’s libel laws to be more like the UK’s but it never happened,) solidified my opinion that the first amendment is a net good.

    I would maybe put Israel below the US based on what I know (since these kind of rankings are shaky) but that’s about the only thing I genuinely think the US does best on a governmental level.

  • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I wouldn’t really call it a “catch”, but these kinds of indexes are heavily colored by the political persuasion of those creating the metrics by which the index judges. For instance, they judge various social inequalities as being a “worse democracy”, which you may or may not agree with.

  • pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Some of my (uneducated) guesses:

    • they’re also wellfare state, so they’re tight when it comes to immigration
    • similar in terms of culture, making it easier for them to agree on which policies to follow. So there may or may not be xenophobia