Is U.S. ‘presidentialist’ democracy failing?

[grumbler]

That's strange. I mean, right when the Constitution was being debated you already had two "parties" being formed: federalists and anti-federalists.

Not debating the point, just that it's strange that they wouldn't see that parties would naturally appear.

Indeed, the debate over ratification of the document demonstrated that the document was wrong to assume that there would be no distension.  The Constitution was amended twelve times before it was fifteen years old.

[Norgy]

Which seems to be the USA/CIA belief.

Huh? What did we do this time?

First of all, am I normally one to blame the US for the world's ills? No.

I'm thinking of the Wolfowitz experiment of democracy in Iraq. And Afghanistan. While the actual war was won easily, peace still isn't won.
And I am not saying it's the fault of the US or the coalition's actions. It's because you can't translate "liberal democracy" overnight.

The rule of law, freedom of religion, meritocracy, they're all good, but developed in a specific historical context which is very Western.
Korea and Taiwan both seem to have found value in democratic elections if not rule, after long periods of autocratic rule. Latin America still struggle to uphold democratic rule, except in Brazil, where socialism has brought millions out of poverty and illiteracy.

[grumbler]

Which seems to be the USA/CIA belief.

Huh? What did we do this time?

I am not even sure what a USA/CIA is.

[Norgy]

That's strange. I mean, right when the Constitution was being debated you already had two "parties" being formed: federalists and anti-federalists.

Not debating the point, just that it's strange that they wouldn't see that parties would naturally appear.

Indeed, the debate over ratification of the document demonstrated that the document was wrong to assume that there would be no distension.  The Constitution was amended twelve times before it was fifteen years old.

It'd be an interesting case study; American and Norwegian constitutional conservatism compared. Both countries have amended their 18th century/early 19th century constitutions at fairly regular intervals when needed, yet constitutional conservatism is a major factor when mobilising voters.

[Norgy]

Which seems to be the USA/CIA belief.

Huh? What did we do this time?

I am not even sure what a USA/CIA is.

TMI.

[Valmy]

First of all, am I normally one to blame the US for the world's ills? No.

I didn't say that you did just I didn't get the context of what it was you were talking about.

I'm thinking of the Wolfowitz experiment of democracy in Iraq. And Afghanistan. While the actual war was won easily, peace still isn't won.
And I am not saying it's the fault of the US or the coalition's actions. It's because you can't translate "liberal democracy" overnight.

The US even knew this and the politicians who led this effort even pointed out the folly of trying to do this in the past. So God knows what we were thinking, but this is not standard US or CIA procedure this was a pretty radical departure. At the time I was like 'huh...well...maybe they know something the rest of us don't' well they didn't. I will point out we implemented systems more similar to the Parliamentary model than ours.

The rule of law, freedom of religion, meritocracy, they're all good, but developed in a specific historical context which is very Western.
Korea and Taiwan both seem to have found value in democratic elections if not rule, after long periods of autocratic rule. Latin America still struggle to uphold democratic rule, except in Brazil, where socialism has brought millions out of poverty and illiteracy.

Spanish and Portuguese cultures are not western? Huh. Anyway the US used socialism to lift millions out of poverty and illiteracy as well, with our public school system. But I have no idea what 'Socialism' is anymore. Does Brazil have widespread nationalization of industries or do they simply have robust public services?

[The Minsky Moment]

It's been amended 27 times.

The first 10 were a package deal.

[The Minsky Moment]

I am not even sure what a USA/CIA is.

Some kind of insurance company I think.

[grumbler]

I am not even sure what a USA/CIA is.

Some kind of insurance company I think.

I thought it had to do with labor unions.

[crazy canuck]

It's been amended 27 times.

The first 10 were a package deal.

And the American love of bulk buying was born.

[The Brain]

I am not even sure what a USA/CIA is.

Some kind of insurance company I think.

I thought it had to do with labor unions.

No not that bad.

[Norgy]

I am not even sure what a USA/CIA is.

Some kind of insurance company I think.

I thought it had to do with labor unions.

Aren't you a bit busy explaining how climate change isn't man-made these days?

[crazy canuck]

I am not even sure what a USA/CIA is.

Some kind of insurance company I think.

I thought it had to do with labor unions.

Aren't you a bit busy explaining how climate change isn't man-made these days?

Wait a minute, when did Grumbler go Hansy on us?

[Norgy]

First of all, am I normally one to blame the US for the world's ills? No.

I didn't say that you did just I didn't get the context of what it was you were talking about.

I'm thinking of the Wolfowitz experiment of democracy in Iraq. And Afghanistan. While the actual war was won easily, peace still isn't won.
And I am not saying it's the fault of the US or the coalition's actions. It's because you can't translate "liberal democracy" overnight.

The US even knew this and the politicians who led this effort even pointed out the folly of trying to do this in the past. So God knows what we were thinking, but this is not standard US or CIA procedure this was a pretty radical departure. At the time I was like 'huh...well...maybe they know something the rest of us don't' well they didn't. I will point out we implemented systems more similar to the Parliamentary model than ours.

The rule of law, freedom of religion, meritocracy, they're all good, but developed in a specific historical context which is very Western.
Korea and Taiwan both seem to have found value in democratic elections if not rule, after long periods of autocratic rule. Latin America still struggle to uphold democratic rule, except in Brazil, where socialism has brought millions out of poverty and illiteracy.

Spanish and Portuguese cultures are not western? Huh. Anyway the US used socialism to lift millions out of poverty and illiteracy as well, with our public school system. But I have no idea what 'Socialism' is anymore. Does Brazil have widespread nationalization of industries or do they simply have robust public services?

Iraq pretty much had the "verzuiling" system implemented, but the elites are rather determined not to cooperate or be co-opted, it seems.
There's also a plethora of evidence of defeat in war instigating regime change. Like Argentina after the Falklands war, to pick a relatively recent example. I don't think the models we used back in the 90s are good enough to predict what happens after authoritarian collapse in countries outside of the west. Apparently civil war is one possibility.

Spain and Portugal are on the Latin fringe, like Italy. They're sort of civilised, yet not, with their huge gap between citizen and elite.

[Iormlund]

I can't speak for Portugal, but I'd say Spain and Italy were influenced by a powerful paternalistic elite (and the violent reactions against it) more than other Western countries.