TLDR: No, not when manipulation, bribing, and suppression are all "legal" tactics.
Which they are legal. Speaking of, a Delaware judge just said corporations can vote in certain circumstances in elections. So we are full tilt into crazy town.
As an aside, your comment makes me reconsider the title though for next time. Maybe Part 2: Assault on Civil Society just to be more direct.
No, we're not still a democracy(if ever we were truly one). The closest thing we lean towards now is a Oligarchy of billionaires and their easily-bought bureaucratic sycophants.
I will use kleptocracy. I wanted to use manic kleptocracy but a colleague rightfully convinced me to drop manic.
The only time you want manic is that relationship with an alt chick in college that burns hot and fast.
Two things.
One. I'll remember this whenever I want to use manic in my writing. Which is too often. Two. Alt chick in college that burns hot and fast. That hit me right in the things I clearly remember telling myself were a bad idea and was not surprised when they turned out to be area in my brain.
They're always a bad idea, but feel so good.
This said, those are the relationships one learns from. It appears we shall have to do this as a country. I was on a choir tour in 1993 where we saw a lot of Nazi symbolism having been blown up.
How do we measure "democracy"? I think the best way is to measure how average citizen's preferences influence policy.
One of the largest political studies in history, conducted by Princeton, attempted to measure this.
The Princeton University and Northwestern University study, titled "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens", concludes that the preferences of the average American have a "near-zero, statistically non-significant impact" on public policy.
I love this study so much. I show it to students who don't believe it and we get into a discussion about how their perception of well being or freedom isn't democracy. It usually ends up with them realizing they couldn't point to a single instant their voice was represented in government at any level. They had, in effect, little to no agency on how representatives voted and how policy was made.
I've been in Texas for 11 years, and I gave up on voting. City Council? Whenever we vote progressive candidates in and they do something progressive, Abbott calls the Legislature into special session to make those laws illegal at the state level.
A good example is when the City of Austin implemented a ban on single-use plastic shopping bags, which given the production of said bags set the O&G lobby into overdrive.
County? Well, my vote doesn't really count there, as Travis is overall aligned with my political views. State? Nah, gerrymandering split the city into I think now five districts at the federal level of unusual shape to dilute Austinites' voices by including sparse areas 10s of miles away. Federal? We just redistricted. Senate could be interesting
There's a reason I chose journalism. Voting harder clearly wasn't going to help even in college.
I looked up a link for further reading: https://archive.org/details/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc
Fascinating. They call us a "civil oligarchy."
I would say civil oligarchy from 2010-2025. Now a full fledged kleptocracy.
What is the difference between the two?
A civil oligrarchy is a well ordered rule by few over the many. It dispenses rules and order to maintain power. That's not inherently bad, the governing could be good because it doesn't want to rock the boat, but instead govern to retain the power structures. Rules, norms, and function ensure the status quo. Even if not entirely free or helpful to the average person, you can expect how your day will go. How interactions with that government by the few may proceed. You can voice your opinion, not be punished (harshly), but not be sure it will change anything. The government functions but changing it to work for more people is purposefully difficult.
A kleptocracy is an unordered rule by few of many. It dispenses rules and order towards a singular purpose. Extraction. That is not good in any sense for the average person. The government functions solely to reward the powerful. There are rules and norms and function, but only to keep the extraction making possible. Even then, they can change to benefit extraction making. So long as you don't shine a light on anything, you're likely fine. If you do voice your opinion, you might end up like the CEO of your company who took issue with paying a new "tax" and found themselves forcibly enrolled in an Olympic diving lesson onto a highway. The government is weaponized to extract and it will punish when people try to muck that up.
That ends my explainer. I say the US is now kleptocratic because power, money, and influence are all being siphoned away, at alarming rates, to people in government. Its passed corruption within a government and is a government for corruption. So, the extraction was dialed up to mind blowing levels, sure, but tilting us into kleptocracy is that the government is weaponized to prevent any impediment to the process. Do note, weaponization of government to extract and benefit just a few doesn't need to be with force or violence, either. Using government to do nothing, too, when it should normally have done something, is weaponization, and I think a more sinister kind.
Thanks for the share. I get (and upvoted) the other quick-reaction comments based on the title, but it's always good to see a specific dive in to what might have changed through the years...
Very US-centric title. Not everyone here lives in the US.
Human society and cultural news, studies, and other things of that nature. From linguistics to philosophy to religion to anthropology, if it's an academic discipline you can most likely put it here.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.