A 24-country survey finds a median of 59% are dissatisfied with how their democracy is functioning, and 74% think elected officials don’t care what people like them think.
Democratic centrism is more of a rule or process or principle. It isn’t even a form of government and it’s compatible with many forms of government.
Proletarian democracy isn’t well defined so I can’t say anything since it means 1000 different things to 1000 different people and often does include representative democracy.
Participatory democracy similarly is a spectrum and is compatible with representative democracy.
So to actually talk about this you would need to be more specific about how the “better” form of government would work.
How do you define “working”? Otherwise I don’t know how you’re measuring it. Would you say that a system that allows for literally one of the most unpopular genocides in history is “working”? Or a system that is working overtime to increase income and wealth disparity rather than reduce it? Is that working? I certainly wouldn’t but I’m guessing you think that’s working swell
Refer to my first comment. It’s not a good system, it’s just better than the other ones. Point to another system that doesn’t have this kind of blood on its hands. China is executing an ethnic cleansing within its borders on its own people right now.
Bu what metric does that system work though? It’s hard to judge it because the info is all unreliable and the government doesn’t share data. We don’t know how bad or good wealth inequality is there.
Worse than what form of democracy exactly?
Everything else people have mentioned in the comments. Proletarian democracy, democratic centralism, participatory democracy, etc.
Well, the first two are really just a way of saying socialism.
Democratic centrism is more of a rule or process or principle. It isn’t even a form of government and it’s compatible with many forms of government.
Proletarian democracy isn’t well defined so I can’t say anything since it means 1000 different things to 1000 different people and often does include representative democracy.
Participatory democracy similarly is a spectrum and is compatible with representative democracy.
So to actually talk about this you would need to be more specific about how the “better” form of government would work.
All the others?
Name one. One actually concrete form of democracy that would work better.
How do you define “working”? Otherwise I don’t know how you’re measuring it. Would you say that a system that allows for literally one of the most unpopular genocides in history is “working”? Or a system that is working overtime to increase income and wealth disparity rather than reduce it? Is that working? I certainly wouldn’t but I’m guessing you think that’s working swell
Refer to my first comment. It’s not a good system, it’s just better than the other ones. Point to another system that doesn’t have this kind of blood on its hands. China is executing an ethnic cleansing within its borders on its own people right now.
Even the US State Department dropped the made-up Uighur genocide. When will you dumbass libs get it
Whatever its called that cuba does where national representation is organized and chosen at the local level. Idk im not a political scientist.
But also name ten that are worse
Bu what metric does that system work though? It’s hard to judge it because the info is all unreliable and the government doesn’t share data. We don’t know how bad or good wealth inequality is there.
I answered your question but you didn’t answer mine.
By what metric does the US system work?
Standard of living is relatively high in the U.S.
Is that because of bourgeois representative democracy, or because of the imperialist exploitation of the global south?