Nice references! I believe people basically prefer democracies if they have a 
choice, and democracies will remain alive as long as the majority of the people 
(including judges, politicians, policemen, soldiers and journalists) support it 
and play by the democratic rules of the game. If the majority begins to play by 
a different set of rules - for example "do not criticize the supreme leader and 
his regime, because he knows best" - then the system slides back into more 
primitive 
forms.https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/07/democracy-could-die-2024/619390/In
 an autocracy there might be a shallow veneer of democracy but no substance 
behind it. Authoritarian systems have often fake elections: elections in name 
only where the winner is already known before. If we define a president as the 
elected head of a republic, then authoritarian systems have presidents in name 
only. They also have courts in name only where criminals - esp. if they belong 
to the ruling regime - remain free while their investigators are imprisoned. 
Ginsburg and Moustafa have written about the politics of courts in 
authoritarian 
regimes.https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Rule-by-law-%3A-the-politics-of-courts-in-regimes-Ginsburg-Moustafa/59fcbc0522a1112aeca0b2cf5246c28c0b4f9feeOne
 thing I find puzzling is that we know as an empirical fact that democracies do 
not wage wars against each other. Why do authoritarian or totalitarian systems 
tend to start wars and invade other countries? Is it because they have a more 
primitive form and do not fit in, like a T-Rex in San Diego? Or do they feel 
threatened? Anne Applebaum had a good article recently why Russia might want to 
invade 
Ukrainehttps://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/02/putin-ukraine-democracy/621465/-J.
-------- Original message --------From: Steve Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> Date: 
2/4/22  17:31  (GMT+01:00) To: friam@redfish.com Subject: [FRIAM] Democracy in 
Name Only: endemic regime instability 
    Someone here is more likely than I to have
          actually read Ziblatt and Levitsky's  How
            Democracies Die 
        
    A recent article (behind a subscribe-wall)
          included the following quote:
    
      
    
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2022-01-20/americas-coming-age-instability
    
      
          
      America may no longer be safe for
            democracy, but it remains inhospitable to autocracy.
      Rather than autocracy, the United
            States appears headed toward endemic regime instability. 
          
      
          
      Such a scenario would be marked by
            frequent constitutional crises, including contested or
            stolen elections and severe conflict between presidents and
            Congress (such as impeachments and executive efforts to
            bypass Congress), the judiciary (such as efforts to purge or
            pack the courts), and state governments (such as intense
            battles over voting rights and the administration of
            elections). The United States would likely shift back and
            forth between periods of dysfunctional democracy and periods
            of competitive authoritarian rule during which incumbents
            abuse state power, tolerate or encourage violent extremism,
            and tilt the electoral playing field against their rivals.
      
          
    
    I found this characterization of our plight very
        compelling, if also very disturbing.
    
      
    It seems as if we have "tumbled our gyros" but in a
        different mode than the rhetoric about "Civil War" and "Descent
        into Autocracy" seem to suggest.   It also characterizes a lot
        of the aspiring/limping democracies we know of in the world
        today up to and including extreme examples such as Russia which
        fits the DINO (democracy in name only) label pretty well.
    
      
    This conception of the problem lead me to a very well
        written HS student-essay by the same title: democracy-in-name-only.
    
      
    Within this essay was a poignant quote:
    
      
        In the
            words of Alexis de Tocqueville,
        “A new science of politics is needed for a new
          world. This, however, is what we think of least; launched in
          the middle of a rapid stream, we obstinately fix our eyes on
          the ruins which may still be descried upon the shore we have
          left, while the current sweeps us along, and drives us
          backward toward the gulf.”
      
    
    
      
    
    
  

.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:
 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to