Yes well, I was trying to be a little sarcastic with the headline, but looking at people’s votes I think I have failed miserably.
Yes well, I was trying to be a little sarcastic with the headline, but looking at people’s votes I think I have failed miserably.
Oh, I thought you were an American worried about how you look outside and I was trying to calm you down. I respect your perspective of course, but it seems to me that a failed state is a bit exaggerated for this, Somalia or Yemen are still a little worse than the USA in the comparison. Authoritarian, close to breaking up as a nation, things like that I think are closer to reality, that is my vision also from the outside, I could be wrong and you may be closer to reality.
Then again, doesn’t that kinda undermine your original point?
I don’t understand why that should be done, the character stops being popular, so good writers stop having interest in working on it, they try to revitalize it with different stories, etc. whether the loss of popularity precedes the bad stories or not is not something that I am in a position to determine. In any case it wasn’t my point, I’m not a big fan of comics, I read it there and in movies/television, which if I continue a little more, it makes some sense
Well, I’m not a big comic reader but that’s what the story with Lex Luthor is about, right? how all of Superman’s immense power is useless against the intelligence of a rich and evil man. I think that is the most famous antagonist and that has transcended the comics the most for a reason. Maybe for fans it’s doomsday or zod, but for casual readers and the general public it is lex and it is for good reason.
Maybe, or maybe they have bad writers because they are not able to imagine credible stories in which Superman’s strength is useless in the face of the corruption of the system and the businessmen who abuse their power, no one would believe stories like that, you need to add kryptonite to make it realistic
I once read that Superman was a humble man who faces big exploitative businessmen, while Batman is a big exploitative businessman who stands up to homeless people. The implications of Batman being more popular than Superman today and what this says about our society is enough for a complete essay.
No, from Europe I tell you, we see you as less democratic than you used to and with many problems that can escalate and screw you up (we are not celebrating here either), but you are still far from being a failed state, there are still police more or less functional, you can still call the fire department if your house catches fire, there is still a clear institutional hierarchy, more authoritarian but clear.
Yes, the speed at which you are flushing democracy down the toilet, when, I don’t know maybe 20 years ago, you were the example to follow in many aspects, it is surprising for everyone.
Like now? The president has always been able to assassinate you, officially, the difference is that before he would have gone to jail and now he won’t.
Yeah, I guess you could be right.
Yes, surely, but there is an underlying problem for this entire system, there is no economically viable alternative to the use of data for advertising sales, without that all those websites cease to be profitable.I don’t think this is good for anyone.
facebook and instagram? I don’t know about the rest of Europe, but in Spain right now practically all newspapers/digital media have copied that model and you either accept cookies or pay
I would like to introduce you to selfhosted@lemmy.world
I hope that if that happens it will be the kick in the ass we need to start setting up our own racket.
P.S. I don’t like military gear, but yours are better than the alternative
Yes, after all the answers I think I am beginning to see the problem, it is not the electoral system but your vision of it. That is why time and time again the answers are about the position of president and not about the system as a whole. You don’t care, you don’t understand that the present is the most powerful individual person, but the presidency is not the most powerful institution, the Congress and the Senate have much more power, being powerful there is much more important than putting a person in office. Not to mention the number of laws, measures and issues that do not even reach the federal level.
In 2010 they had a coalition government made up of Torys and Liberals, in Great Britain the executive power is not just the Prime Minister, it is the entire Council of Ministers and it was not made up only of Torys. Obviously a coalition government is not possible in the American system, but a third party being influential in the cameras is and I still don’t see because it is impossible
I know and understand the difference between parliamentarism and presidentialism, but I am not talking about the election of presidents exclusively, I am talking about the political system of the country in general. If 20~30% of the chambers are in the hands of a third party, the country becomes more plural and public debates better represent opinions and I don’t understand why that is not possible.
I don’t know, I don’t deny what you say, but as I was answering to another, then the United States is not a democracy anymore, it is a plutocracy where a few elites can decide policies, but the population lacks the capacity to change the trends even if there is a broad consensus for it.
this is sad
But you have a parliament (congress and senate), right? Why isn’t there a third party in these chambers?
Well, I don’t know, like I said before I’m not American and I don’t know all the ins and outs of the American electoral system, but if this is really impossible, I’ll just stop thinking of the United States as a democracy in any way. Changing the democrats party from within has proven impossible since Hillary’s rigged election in 2016, moving her policies to the left runs into a constant wall of “this is how we will lose the center”, well, I don’t know, I just think the system is so broken that either something different is done or it’s not going to be fixed
Yes, I suppose you are right, the most basic thing has not failed but certain fundamental and important institutions seem to be in it, in any case one can have a horrible and dystopian but functional totalitarian state, without being failed, I don’t know if I explain my point correctly .
this is also for @9point6@lemmy.world, I don’t know how to answer both of you at the same time, but what I say is valid for both of us.