Will Trump Destroy Liberal Democracy

There are many different topics in this article, however, and I assume the other topiucs will be raised if one reads the article, this one in particular caught my attention.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/05/01/a-hundred-days-of-trump

The Trumpian rebellion against liberal democracy is not a local event; it is part of a disturbing global trend. When the Berlin Wall fell, in 1989, and the Soviet Union dissolved, two years later, the democratic movement grew and liberalism advanced, and not only in Eastern and Central Europe. During the course of thirty years, the number of democracies in the world expanded from thirty to roughly a hundred. But, since 2000, nation-states of major consequence—Russia, Hungary, Thailand, and the Philippines among them—have gone in the opposite, authoritarian direction. India, Indonesia, and Great Britain have become more nationalistic. The Arab Spring failed nearly everywhere. The prestige and the efficacy of democracy itself is in question. The Chinese Communist Party, which crushed a pro-democracy movement on Tiananmen Square, in 1989, then set out to make the case that it could achieve enormous economic growth while ignoring the demand for human rights and political liberties. In Russia, Vladimir Putin has suppressed political competition, a nascent independent media, and any hope for an independent judiciary or legislature while managing to convince millions of his countrymen that the United States is hypocritical and immoral, no more democratic than any other country. In Turkey, Erdoğan has jailed tens of thousands of political opponents, muzzled the press, and narrowly won a referendum providing him with nearly dictatorial powers. Western Europe is also in question. In France, Marine Le Pen, the leader of the National Front, is polling credibly in a Presidential campaign guided by two of her longtime associates and fascist sympathizers, Frédéric Chatillon and Axel Loustau.

The stakes of this anti-democratic wave cannot be overestimated. Nor can it be ignored to what degree authoritarian states have been able to point out the failures of the West—including the wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and Libya—and use them to diminish the moral prestige of democracy itself. As Edward Luce writes, in “The Retreat of Western Liberalism,” “What we do not yet know is whether the world’s democratic recession will turn into a global depression.”

If we were ever naïve enough to believe that progress in political life is inevitable, we are experiencing the contradiction. Freedom House, a nongovernmental organization that researches global trends in political liberty, has identified an eleven-year decline in democracies around the globe and now issues a list of “countries to watch.” These are nations that “may be approaching important turning points in their democratic trajectory.” The ones that most concern Freedom House include South Africa, Iraq, Kyrgyzstan, Ecuador, Zimbabwe, and, the largest of them, the United States. The reason the group includes the U.S. is Trump’s “unorthodox” Presidential campaign and his “approach to civil liberties and the role of the United States in the world.”

In 1814, John Adams evoked the Aristotelian notion that democracy will inevitably lapse into anarchy. “Remember, democracy never lasts long,” he wrote to John Taylor, a former U.S. senator from Virginia, in 1814. “It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy that did not commit suicide.” As President, Donald Trump, with his nativist and purely transactional view of politics, threatens to be democracy’s most reckless caretaker, and a fulfillment of Adams’s dark prophecy.

 

Old Trapper there has been a move against democracy recently Yet most countries are democratic Both Communism andfascism have failed. Democracy is not perfect it involves the tyranny of the majority. It has been linked to Capitalism and like all system can not deliver everything we want Many turn away by the corruption of politicians economic problems that leave a large art of the population poor.
Yet other system have fail too. It is unlikely that nationalism will relace it in view o all the war it has caused. Anarchy may have the result in the nineteenth century but not today because it has been tried and failed.

 

I can remember when they said we had to fight in Vietnam to prevent the "domino effect" of Communism. Guess what? Communism is not dead, it is stronger then ever. Guess what is dying? Democracy. Not the kind you are thinking of, the kind the Founders understood, and established here. And who is killing it? The right wingers who think they have all of the answers. We were established as a Democratic Republic with a secular form of government. As such, we are a sovereign nation state, with the ultimate power in the citizens, who are equally entitled to vote, and who, directly or indirectly, elect representatives to exercise that power. However, the people have seen fit to acquiesce that power (less then 50% of the people engage in the political process) to the elitists (aristocracy) such as Trump. Trump, in his narcissistic manner has seen fit to violate the law, ignore the Constitution, and show that he is devoid of any ethical conduct.

And unfortunately too many have seen fit to ignore his unfitness to be President which in turn threatens the very future of the country.

 

Old Trapper I have been to Vietnam as well as China and Russia. They all have a mostly Capitalist economy. Vietnam is not a pure Communist state and most people are happier than under the corrupt Diem government. In that sense it is more democratic. The USA still has the democratic Republic, perhaps not as secular. The citizens are still equally entitled to vote. Trump has not yet violate the constitution. Whether he is ethical depends n your definition.
In any case you can not get rid of him. Few in Congress would support impeachment

 

You were but the US is not the only country in the world. Not really sure what your point is?

 

The form of "capitalism" in a Communist country is highly controlled by the government, and one can lose any enterprise he might have at the whim of the Communist Party. Even socialist countries like Denmark have some form of capitalism just as the US has a form of socialism.

As to Trump, it is argued that he has already violated the Constitution. First with his ban on refugees which consisted of a religious qualification. Remember that minority religions in those seven countries were exempted from the ban. The second time is his consistent violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution which is quite easily proven. And while nepotism is not a violation of the Constitution it is a violation of the law. But then, considering Trumps high disregard for the Constitution, and his trumpites lack of concern for the welfare of the country, it is easily seen why he will not be impeached just as others in the past have not been:

http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/04/30/trump-just-went-off-much-hates-constitution/

“In an interview with FOX News, Trump slammed the United States Constitution, calling its system of checks and balances on his power “archaic.”

“It’s a very rough system. It’s an archaic system … It’s really a bad thing for the country.”

Trump was undoubtedly reacting to both of his travel bans on predominantly Muslim countries getting struck down in federal court. Of the matter, Trump’s Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, went as far as to say:

“I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an island in the Pacific can issue an order that stops the president of the United States from what appears to be clearly his statutory and constitutional power.”

Trump has also taken heat for calling Turkey’s President Recep Erdogan “to congratulate him on winning a much-disputed referendum that will cement his autocratic rule over the country and, in the view of many experts, erode Turkey’s democratic institutions.”

While Trump’s own autocratic tendencies may be stifled by the constraints of our democratic government, Americans are grateful that there are checks to Trump’s unconstitutional actions. The United States Constitution is the cornerstone of American democracy, and will survive long after Trump’s unsuccessful efforts to dismantle it.”

 

The US is supposed to be the standard bearer for a free society. Not only is the US losing that standard to be replaced by God only knows what, numerous other countries are also losing their freedoms while the Authoritarians are gaining ground.

 

OLD trapper most countries are a mixture of Socialism and Capitalism. It is true Capitalism is more controled in Communist countries. However it still operates.
Trump has little control over capitalism . Most of his moves on migration have been rejected by the courts . This is the strength of a constitution like the USA that limits the power of governments.
It is hard to say that countries are losing this standard. Some are become more authoritarian . Like Turkey, Syria and Iran. Others are trying new parties like France .
The rise of politicians from outside the main parties might be a sign that freedom is gaining ground.

 

I believe that was the point I made

The Courts ruled that Trump had violated the Constitution. Your statement was that he had not.

Read the article I posted. It clearly says that the Authoritarians are winning especially in the past 30 years, and even gives examples.

Doesn't appear to be that way. Trump will stifle freedom just as Erdogan has, and will, or even Putin.

 

I guess that's one of those American things, how the US sees the US - bit like the MLB World Series. I think you just need to junk the hype and break the stereotype. The US is not a standard bearer for anything other than Baseball and TV Ads interupted by the Superbowl.

Know one said democracy was perfect, however, your voters democratically voted in trump. He can only serve 8 years max - in 4 years there will be another election and democracy will decide what the outcome is, or you thinking that Trump will do an Erdogan?

The US political system is insane thats why you get the likes of Trump. Its not the outcome that is at issue its your whole system.

 

Name another country that has spread the idea of freedom. and fought for it, and died for it, to the extent that the US has. Britain? Scotland? Where would Britain, etc., be if not for the US entering WW1, or WW2?

The possibility is there although we heard that same chant from the right when Clinton was in office, and when Obama was in office. As to whether, or not, we will hear it from the left with Trump remains to be seen. It is obvious he cares not for the Constitution, and would change it if he could especially when it comes to the freedom of the press. In fact, I would even question the idea that Trump was Democratically elected wince he did not receive a majority of the vote, and then there was the outside interference. Of course, Clinton herself was not the most desirable candidate, and if not for the vast ignorance of the people we could have elected an honest candidate. Then too, over the years the Plutocrats, Oligarchs, Corptocrats, whatever, have taken control of the political system which is what Trump railed against, feeding the angst of the people, and now has shown he is part of. Even now he has admitted he is a globalist settling one of the many lies he told as a candidate.

It is not the insanity of the system, it is the corruption that has taken control. IMO, it will not be until the people have lost all control that they will wake up, and, if they are not too cowed by then, will take the system back to what the Founders had in mind.

 

Old trapper The only country you mention in being more anti Democratic is Turkey. I agree with you on this. There are many countries that spread the idea of freedom. Britain did this long before the USA in both world wars. Greece started democracy and it was spread by Florence.
It is true American late intervention in both world wars help to achieve victory for the allies. Without American intervention Britain may have lost but this is hard to prove.
The same is about American intervention in the Pacific war. American naval strength won the battle of the Coral Sea and this victory help saved Australia. But victories by Australian forces in New Guinea did also help. America made the victory against Japan quicker but it is debatable whether it alone saved Australia.

 

Britain was a slave nation, and supported the Monarchy. "The sun never sets on the British Empire", right? The House of Lords, established in the 1600's, was still not representative of a Democracy since the people had no voice in the government. In fact, slavery was not eliminated until 1807, and then too not until 1833. So, where was the freedom expressed by the US in its Constitution although a compromise was reached that allowed certain States to retain Slavery. And while Greece was the "founder" of Democracy, it was still limited to the few, not the majority.

Not hard at all. Germany had the military might, and was crushing Europe. Even the Russians could not stop the massive destruction, and advance of the Germans. France with its Maquis proved no match until the US intervened. Britain relied on US aircraft, and pilots, long before the US officially entered the coflict.

Well, it was called the Allied Forces for a reason. However, without the US forces the outcome was pretty much assured.

 

OLD TRAPPER I agree that early attempts to spread Democracy were limited to those who had the right to vote. But it was improvement on the one man rule before that.
Slavery was not abolished to long after Democratic governments were established. Slaves had no votes anywhere. But only in the USA did they form a sizable minority.
Wether Germany could have defeated Britain in either war is still debatable. It could be argue no side really won WW1. "The armistice of 11 November 1918, represented not so much victory or defeat but sheer exhaustion (An Incomplete History of World war 1 by Edwin Kiester Jn. WW2 look even crazier at first. Statements like "it is scarcely an exaggeration to say that at Present(1942) mankind as a species is demented and than nothing is so urgent upon us as the recovery of self control ( H>G Wells A short History of the World. )Germany accepted the dictatorship of Hitler to unite Germany and revenge what happen in ww1' Therefor every German desired the achievement which only total war would give. " (The Course of German History A J P Taylor)

It became clear during the war That Germany could not achieve total victory. Not only did Russian proved an unconquerable country but so did Britain after the Battle of Britain. Some people in Britain were prepare to sign a treaty with Germany. But most supported Churchill resistance. This all happen before American intervention. But this intervention did speed up the victory. You are right it was allied effort not only in the Pacific but in Europe