this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2026
578 points (99.1% liked)

politics

29001 readers
1761 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump’s authoritarian drift in his second term places the country on a par with Hungary or Turkey, according to a ranking by Sweden’s V-Dem Institute

Democratic backsliding is advancing in the developed world. The annual report from Sweden's V-Dem Institute leaves no room for doubt: almost a quarter of the world experienced democratic backsliding, or a shift towards autocratization, in 2025, and six of the 10 newly regressive countries identified in the research are located in Europe and North America, including G-7 powers such as Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

But the most unsettling conclusion reached by the Swedish institute is that the United States


once a proud beacon of the more or less free world


is no longer a liberal democracy and is now on a par with countries like Hungary or Turkey, thanks to President Donald Trump. Autocracy is also spreading throughout Europe, but its reach extends far beyond the Old Continent: 41% of the world's population (3.4 billion people) now live in countries where democracy is eroding.

The institute, which belongs to the University of Gothenburg and uses 48 metrics in its evaluation, is one of the most reliable sources when it comes to rating the state of governments around the world, and the conclusion of its 2026 study confirms the worst fears about the authoritarian drift of the U.S. under Trump's leadership.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 33 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

Worldwide, democracy has regressed to its lowest levels since the mid-1970s

I've been saying over and over again here, that it's generally been going backwards since the 70's. This goes for democracy, respect for human rights and minorities, and the peace movement.

And many people here simply don't believe it. (I'm guessing younger ones)

[–] ChillPenguin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

It's not just younger ones. I talk to a large group of boomers and they are all in the same boat of "everything is fine, we'll just vote the next election. We've had presidents like this before."

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

We’ve had presidents like this before.”

On that they are seriously mistaken, of course there have been bad presidents like Bush, but Trump is a whole new class of bad.
I hope they are right, and that all this can be solved by a simple election, but I'm not betting on it.

[–] ChillPenguin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah I really don't think so. The damage is already done to democracy. I can believe we used to have a shared common decency. But it's been rotting for a while now.

Plus boomers aren't known for actually fixing problems. The things I bring up to them, their responses are always like "well we will figure it out sometime" as they continue doing what they want. So uhhh... I don't have a lot of confidence.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Isn't it about time the next generation begins to take responsibility.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

The boomers I know are pissed, and know what is going on, and always have. Most of them anyway.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Let’s talk about what this really means, though. Why would that happen?

Could it be anything like:

  • Because power is a fickle structure by nature and therefore democracy is an unstable system?
  • Because technology advanced so fast that it yields control to whomever sits at its forefront?
  • Because society chose not to make theoretical laws for technology that had yet been invented?
  • Because (e.g., Russian) state propaganda was allowed to become so powerful that it actually destabilized global democracy?
  • Because we were naïvely assuming we had a stable democracy, when in fact we never really did — it just hadn’t been under enough stress to show its flaws?
  • Because institutional capitalism with monarch style governance is an economic system that necessarily leads to authoritarianism?
  • Because the libertarian value tolerance of debate is an ill founded ideology, and we actually need more intolerance (e.g., limitations on free speech)?
  • Because social media is not respected by the masses as the enormous medium of control that it wound up being in actuality?

What’s the next big realization here for mankind?

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You seem to miss the fact that we lost control of society with both political parties being captured by the oligarchy, unions being infected with the mob and beset by law enforcement, and all other parts of the long game of the business roundtable of 1971 to seize control.

Everything you mention is after the fact. We were disunited, and rallied around controlled opposition.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yeah but even that doesn’t really get to the root of things. Did that happen because we had not accounted for its possibility when constructing the democracy? Was that always happening? Is oligarchy a naturally occurring problem and foe to democracy?

Why were they able to seize control at all, if we had a function democracy before then? Surely if it were a “functioning democracy,” then their seizure of control would have been democratically acquired — right? Obviously wrong, but why?

[–] toad@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Americans doing regime changes, mostly

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean, sure. But shouldn’t something be said about what that means for democracy? Would it be:

“Democracy only works if you don’t try regime changes in foreign states, otherwise it starts to experience a phenomenon where the democracy withers”

…?

I’m doubtful it’s that simple. If it is, then democracy seems rather unstable in its current form. All it takes is one bad leader to trigger a chain reaction toward failure? Again, I’m doubtful.

There’s got to be a bigger story here.

[–] BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The rich people are in an exclusive club and collude without meeting because what's good for one is good for the other. They've also been a big driving force for change in the world from consumer based economic models to "supplier" based models. IE themselves.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

When you put it that way, it sounds like democracy requires a global effort to continuously thwart such collusion, such wealth, maybe such exclusively? Something… It sounds righteous to me, but also like something that can become equally oppressive in perhaps many different ways.

What you describe is something that I understand to have been the case for most of human history, if not all of it. How do you resolve that issue? And, if that’s really the issue, what do you make of modern democracies?

Democracy grew out of too much power to the rich, though since day one they've been thwarting it where they can.

I honestly don't have real answers for this, I just know of the problem.

[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

We need a second hippie revolution. And I don't mean the half-assed underground "comebacks" from the late 90s and 2010s, a real movement that actually influences policy.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

Hippies did fuck all and then ended up voting for Reagan.

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Hippies were a CIA OP to distract the left from organising and doing drugs instead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_CHAOS

[–] mriormro@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago

Lol, the hippies didn't do shit.