Democracy! What is it really and which countries have it?

**Norton** · 13-12-2007, 07:11 PM

In several posts the word democracy pops up often. Comments such as "they (some country) don't understand democracy" and others of this ilk got me to thinking, "what is it really and which countries have it?". I found this Economist Intelligence Unit report to be a pretty good way to measure the degree to which countries are "democratic". Although I might be inclined to argue the rankings of the 28 democracies listed, the ranking of "flawed democracies" are IMO justified.

<snippet>
"The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy index is based on five categories: electoral process and pluralism; civil liberties; the functioning of government; political participation; and political culture. The condition of having free and fair competitive elections, and satisfying related aspects of political freedom, is clearly the basic requirement of all definitions.

Several things stand out. Although almost half of the world’s countries can be considered to be democracies, the number of “full democracies” is relatively low (only 28). Almost twice as many (54) are rated as “flawed democracies”. Of the remaining 85 states, 55 are authoritarian and 30 are considered to be “hybrid regimes”. As could be expected, the developed OECD countries (with the notable exception of Italy) dominate among full democracies, although there are two Latin American, two central European and one African country, which means that the level of development is not a binding constraint. Only one Asian country, Japan, makes the grade."

Democracy index | Liberty and justice for some | Economist.com

Rounding out the rest of the 28 democracies are:

16 - Spain (8.34), 17 - US (8.22), 18 - Czech Republic (8.17), 19 - Portugal (8.16), 20 - Belgium (8.15), 20 - Japan (8.15), 22 - Greece (8.13), 23 - UK (8.08), 24 - France (8.07), 25 - Mauritius (8.04), 25 - Costa Rica (8.04), 27 - Slovenia (7.96), 27 - Uruguay (7.96).

For complete report.

http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/D...EX_2007_v3.pdf

**chinthee** · 13-12-2007, 07:13 PM

The top 15 are all completely irrelevant countries in the new world order.

**Norton** · 13-12-2007, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by chinthee

The top 15 are all completely irrelevant countries in the new world order.

My thoughts exactly but found it interesting they should be ranked so high on the extent they practice democracy (as defined by the Economist).

**chinthee** · 13-12-2007, 07:21 PM

Yeah, well little irrelevant, pussy countries with Utopian ideals will always rank first.

The world actually runs on stouter stuff.

**Norton** · 13-12-2007, 07:25 PM

^Yes, via alliances with the big boys that provide the protection they need to practice their democracy.

**Texpat** · 13-12-2007, 07:29 PM

^at a fraction of the defense costs.

Originally Posted by chinthee

The top 15 are all completely irrelevant countries in the new world order.

That's not gonna win you any friends.

People don't like to think of themselves as irrelevent.

Insignificant is my choice of terms.

Having said that, a fair number of countries on the top 15 seem like fairly decent places to live.*

*if they could migrate south with global warming, reduce the tax burden, offer affordable housing without 60-years of hard labor -- wonder what a bedsit goes for in N Korea?

**chinthee** · 13-12-2007, 07:30 PM

^^Damn straight. And all the bleeding hearts who are citizens from these small piss ant countries and from whom we hear so loudly, don't realize who butters their bread, until someone takes their bread away from them.

*And, they think just because they speak English the big bad/good USA is going to save them in times of crisis. ffs. Let them fall one by one in my opinion if they don't know who to thank now for their freedom.

**chitown** · 13-12-2007, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by chinthee

The top 15 are all completely irrelevant countries in the new world order.

Come on Chintee, I think you should look at Luxemborg and Malta a little more carefully.......they are responsible for some earth shattering contributions.......

**chinthee** · 13-12-2007, 07:43 PM

^Yes, true, I retract my statements. My Private banker is in Luxembourg and I used to love their private banking facilities until they sold out.

Sorry, no redeeming qualities today. We can get everything somewhere else cheaper and better than Europe.

**sabang** · 14-12-2007, 12:40 AM

I don't see Germany as irrelevant in the New World Order.
Neither the EU.
Neither Canada, or even Australia.

What the ferk is the New World Order anyway? that sounds like something Hitler or Stalin would say.

**chinthee** · 14-12-2007, 12:43 AM

No, the new world order is the reality that capitalism has won. Plain and simple.

**Texpat** · 14-12-2007, 12:46 AM

I listened to Rummy once talk about the new world defense.

Made perfect sense to me. why hunker down in Japan, Korea, Germany .. when the threats are hundreds of km away in distant lands that would love the securituy and buks.

If it doesn't include you. maybe you're becoming obsolete.

**sabang** · 14-12-2007, 12:52 AM

Well, we all know what a brilliant military tactician Rummy is!

**Texpat** · 14-12-2007, 01:05 AM

I think he was on to something -- firmly established countries are not the places to build inroads. If you're not pushing into the "stans" and southern phils and Issan (ha) and spinnin your wheels.

Japan, Germany, Turkey are so yesterday. a better option is an expeditionary force that is better educated, better equipped , better trained, better mobilized to become a quick reactionary force.

As someone a lot smarter than me on TD said, making quick, correct decisions is a hallmark of the US.

**sabang** · 14-12-2007, 01:16 AM

I would agree that there are many US forces where they are not really needed, and a leaner quicker reaction expedition force would be more effective and cheaper. Is that a Rummy doctrine?

**Hootad Binky** · 14-12-2007, 01:52 AM

I think the Greeks probably had the purest, fairest and most representative types of democracy. Each citizen had an equal vote and also had to serve at some point in the local government. Representation + responsibilities

(But they had slaves, though)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Rumsfeld's doctrine of smaller forces and stealth technology and "precision" bombing didn't work. It failed. He was fired.

If the US had had more soldiers, a comprehensive reconstruction plan that involved hiring Iraqis and Iraqi companies and massive civilian aid, the second invasion of Iraq might have been a success. But they didn't, because:

a) they didn't care about Iraqis at all
b) oil
c) the opportunity to rape the American taxpayer with some very rich contracts to well-connected companies that routinely supplied over-priced, substandard services better accomplished by a military specialist or an Iraqi
d) they had no reconstruction plan in the first place

**Whiteshiva** · 14-12-2007, 12:21 PM

What is interesting is that a list of countries ranked by standard of living would probably come out pretty similar.

Now is that because democracy leads to stability and a better quality of life or the other way around?

Originally Posted by Texpat

As someone a lot smarter than me on TD said, making quick, correct decisions is a hallmark of the US.

Unless it was BG who said that, I am sure it was meant as a joke!

**Lily** · 14-12-2007, 12:45 PM

Oh dear

Originally Posted by Norton

Yes, via alliances with the big boys that provide the protection they need to practice their democracy.

When did you last 'protect' Sweden?

Originally Posted by chinthee

And, they think just because they speak English the big bad/good USA is going to save them in times of crisis. ffs. Let them fall one by one in my opinion if they don't know who to thank now for their freedom.

What are you talking about?

**Norton** · 14-12-2007, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by Lily

When did you last 'protect' Sweden?

Personally I never have.

For many of the past 170 years, Sweden has had a policy of “neutrality” in its foreign affairs. It is no coincidence that the country has not been at war since 1814.

Sweden was able to get through WWII much like Switzerland.... trading with the Axis but avoiding the death and destruction of the war. Sweden supplied Germany with iron ore and high quality ball bearings, among other critical industrial supplies which in turn made them lots of money. Fortunately for Sweden, former Allied countries have not held a grudge against Sweden for it's collaboration with Nazi Germany.

Although not an official member, since the mid 1990s, Sweden has increasingly cooperated with NATO. And it is now developing into a country that can play a significant role as a security provider and vital Partner to the Allies and assurance it will be protected by NATO if needed.

**Lily** · 14-12-2007, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by Norton

Personally I never have.

And nor has your country ever saved Sweden.

And Nato is the US of A?

**Dalton** · 14-12-2007, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by chinthee

Damn straight. And all the bleeding hearts who are citizens from these small piss ant countries and from whom we hear so loudly, don't realize who butters their bread, until someone takes their bread away from them. *And, they think just because they speak English the big bad/good USA is going to save them in times of crisis. ffs. Let them fall one by one in my opinion if they don't know who to thank now for their freedom.

That is a-lot of bull....You place US like the white knight, that they secure freedom to those countries, and they should kneel down and kiss the ass of every fokking american....What a load of bollox....

You forget one thing, and that is where does your beloved US get the money from to finance all this ?? Not long ago Saudi-Arabia who is number 159 on the list, bought a huge part of City-bank in the US, that's just one out of many, so get down from that white horse...please...

**Dalton** · 14-12-2007, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by Norton

For many of the past 170 years, Sweden has had a policy of “neutrality” in its foreign affairs. It is no coincidence that the country has not been at war since 1814.

Ironic...Sweden is among the biggest exporters of weapons in the world...So much for being "neutral"

**Norton** · 14-12-2007, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by Lily

And nor has your country ever saved Sweden.

First you may be mistaken about my country. I never said in any post any country saved Sweden. These are your words.

I said:

Originally Posted by Norton

via alliances with the big boys that provide the protection they need to practice their democracy.

Originally Posted by Lily

And Nato is the US of A?

Nonsense. NATO is comprised of 26 member states. During the cold war NATO was a benefit to the US and therefore, the US did play a dominant role along with the UK, France and Germany. Since the end of cold war the US plays a smaller and smaller role with the EU countries taking a predominate role.

**Lily** · 14-12-2007, 02:03 PM

^Well, why the chest beating cries of 'saving' those 'pissant countries'?

For a people whose only response is to cry 'you are jealous of us' at any criticism, the first few posts on here, sound to me, like pure and unadulterated jealousy.

What have those countries done to you to deserve the bile you have heaped on them?

Come out on top of a statistic, that you think your country deserves?

Dont you call yourselves 'The Greatest Democracy on Earth'?

Is that what is sticking in your craw?

**chinthee** · 14-12-2007, 02:05 PM

^Usually it's not the biggest and strongest kid on the block who is jealous....

Thread: Democracy! What is it really and which countries have it?

Thread Tools

Display

Democracy! What is it really and which countries have it?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions