Democracy index

Parliamentary democracy belongs in the trash 2bh

Also, why in this kind of maps there is always "no data" on The Western Sahara?

Because its a disputed territory nobody legally owns it

like Falklands on the map?

Yeh and the Kuril islands too

Democracy is a fucking sham, the more green, the faster the country is getting pushed feet first into a shredder.

>serbia
>even close to democracy
choose one

Look at that tiny based country in South America, shit!

The "most democratic" Western countries are *coincidentally* the most blacked ones. This really activates my almonds, dude.

Basically agree, but a well armed nationalistic militia, and I don't just think about automatic rifles, more like the right to have anti aircraft, anti material weaponry and artillery, would have the same effect, when not even a better oversight capability than a monarch

>meme flag.
>retarded statement that can only be explained by colour blindness.

Hmmmm.

I'm sure Binland would work either as democratic or authoritarian if it retained the healthcare and education systems it currently has. Of course suddendly switching to the other extreme would cause distress and mayhem, but if it was embedded into our culture it could work.

Shit, are we the goodest goys?

Everyone should switch to proportional representation. You can't waste your vote by voting for an unpopular or extreme party. If and when they don't get elected your vote transfers to another more main stream party of your choosing. Or not. You can just vote for your niche party.

Why is Uruguay so absolutely democratic?

No, because a well-armed militia would have no actual oversight ability. It would either be doing nothing, or starting a civil war.

Oversight needs to be part of the structure of the government, with formal and informal powers to alter the way the government is run that don't rest on the basis of force.

A militia is no part of the government.

Nothing interesting happens there.

>we still haven't banned micks

Eu countries are to green. You can't be 'super democratic' and in the EU at the same time

Good goy coming through.
What did I win?
I bet I won more immigrants and less jobs again didn't I?

Can confirm. Voted for the Mad Man Abott ended up with the Sad Man Turnbull.

Pretty much a graph about how badly a population gets controlled by the media.

So I notice that the "flawed democracies" are the ones that actually still work somewhat properly, while the other ones are the ones that continue to produce results that the majority don't agree with (aside from Iceland, I believe). What even are the specifications here? Canada has less checks and balances than the US.

>USA
>Flawed Democracy
>Flawed
>Implying the USA wasn't built to be a "flawed" democracy because it is actually a republic
Democracy is tyranny and that's why (((they))) push for things like removal of the electoral college.

Well there's no real democracies on Earth so we know that isn't their standard.

You are thinking way too legalistic and naive. Oversight inside the political system is pointless. Even more pointless is having oversight organisations inside the same branch of the political system. It is rational for the agents inside the structure to chose outcomes that put them better than those outside their direct institutional environment and that on the cost of those. One can argue, that the political institutions derives their agents from the outside, but regarding the bureaucratic system and the prevalence that posts are inherited, that's a hippy pipe dream.

A militia on the other hand, that is part of the civil institution or the monarchic, has the interest of its agents in mind. Reads, when the political system tries to put its own agent better at the cost of the economic and civil institutions, the threat that the parliament might get some mortar rain or that agents risks their live taking decisions that benefits them alone on the cost of the outer environment, the agents would think twice, where a simple oversight organisation inside the political system is just controlled opposition

A militia cannot do anything other than start a civil war.

A civil war is not beneficial to the country.

>USA
>Flawed Democracy

pic related

unironically fuck democracy.

You would say that A-rab

okay goy, stay good.

Democracy and a multitude of existing oversight organisations and mechanisms have shown that they don't benefit the country either. The rationality of their agents is to not bite the hand that feeds them, which is are the budget committees, government and parliament. Elections are easily manipulated and represent the worst form of oversight.

A civil war would be more benefitial for democracies in the longterm than to keep feeding fat bureaucrats getting fatter

>We flawed goys now

Agree

>>Democracy and a multitude of existing oversight organisations and mechanisms have shown that they don't benefit the country either.
A laughable statement.

The only prosperous countries in the world are democracies, and this is not an accident. Free enterprise leads to prosperity, and it's only possible if the broader society is free. When powerful interests pick winners and choosers in the market based on how much wealth will flow to the top you get poverty and disaster.

The answer is more democracy, not less.

>A civil war would be more benefitial for democracies in the longterm than to keep feeding fat bureaucrats getting fatter
This is an even more ridiculous statement.

You're a sheltered upper middle class child whose closest experience with violence is what you see on T.V.

How many decades - or CENTURIES - has Syria's civil war set that country back?

based majar.

Democracy is fun, they make promises and after elections all promises get cancelled out between politicians. you're left with nothing you voted for. Yeah it's great.

>When powerful interests pick winners and choosers in the market based on how much wealth will flow to the top you get poverty and disaster.
A democracy is nothing more than that. The only difference to a dictatorship is, that non of the deciding agents have long term goals beyond their mandate, which makes it more rational to get as much resources as possible and screw those who come after. Great example are the socialist regimes of western Europe and the Obama regime in the US managing to create debt for multiple generations while enriching their own constituency.
>ib4 not real com..democracy

>How many decades - or CENTURIES - has Syria's civil war set that country back?
Are you implying that Syria is a civil war that broke out in a democracy and was totally not fuelled by outside forces who where eager to install a communist regime. btw, Assad is winning and I'm eagerly waiting to invest in Syria, the growth rates will be glorious

Dictator 1
Democracy 0

>A democracy is nothing more than that
So why does it happen so much less in democracies and so much more in autocracies?

Your complaints are not borne out by the empirical data. Democracies are perceived as less corrupt, and are far more prosperous for everyone, than autocracies.

>Are you implying that Syria is a civil war that broke out in a democracy
Yeah, because guns know what kind of civil war they're being used in and deliberately shoot less damaging bullets.