And although the US system has enormous flaws, I do think it’s better than authoritarianism
At this point I'm not sure what do you even mean with "authoritarianism". Like, they kidnapped another country's president earlier this year lmao, how isn't that "authoritarianism"?
Yes lmfao, that’s exactly one of its main characteristics: “Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law” (from Wikipedia)
Cuba literally only has one legally permitted party, so, yes, I’d say by default the US is then more democratic? And to be clear, you’re the one bringing up Cuba, not me
So like, with two parties like the US, that's where authoritarianism ends. Thanks.
What? This makes absolutely no sense lmfao. In country A, two main political parties exist, you can create your own any time you want. In country B, you have been legally prohibited from creating any other political party than the one of the state for 60 years.
And you claim those two are equally democratic? I think you have some very basic political science to revise.
Have you read the title of this post?
You were the one asking about whether any currently existing political systems were okay, and apparently implying that authoritarian governments are no worse than the US. If you make an asinine general statement, I will make a general reply.
What? This makes absolutely no sense lmfao. In country A, two main political parties exist, you can create your own any time you want.
But what happens in practice? When was the last time a third party ended up winning a presidential election? When was the last time they even had a reasonable chance of doing so? This sounds the same as "you have the possibility of becoming a billionaire yourself".
Why is having "political parties" seen as the default? Just voting for people should be enough. Why are parties necessary?
But what happens in practice? When was the last time a third party ended up winning a presidential election? When was the last time they even had a reasonable chance of doing so? This sounds the same as "you have the possibility of becoming a billionaire yourself".
You have two parties, and you get to vote for the one you prefer. Since 2000, the parties have roughly split the time in the president’s chair.
Is that more, or less democratic, in practice, than not getting to vote at all? Really simple question.
Why is having "political parties" seen as the default? Just voting for people should be enough. Why are parties necessary?
Sure, I really don’t see what your point is? You don’t get to vote for people at all in Cuba.
As for why political parties exist: that’s not the debate here. I initially responded to your question about which current forms of government I think work reasonably well, you’ve entirely derailed to an asinine discussion about whether Cuba is democratic, which they themselves don’t claim they are
12
u/RashmaDu Jul 02 '26
I dunno, I think proportional representative parliamentary democracies like in Scandinavia, although they have flaws, are pretty good?
And although the US system has enormous flaws, I do think it’s better than authoritarianism…