3 ms·

First you must define what you mean by "nations are hostages of their criminal governments". Only very few countries are considered "full democracy", with some

First you must define what you mean by "nations are hostages of their criminal governments". Only very few countries are considered "full democracy", with some other considered "flawed democracy", but the majority can be said are worse or better dictatorships.

kspacewalk2 6y ago
Democracy Index compiled by the Economist[0] places 76 countries into the 'democracies' pile, a further 23 into 'hybrid regimes' pile, and the other 68 are autocracies of various types, with Belarus at #150 of 167 on the list. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#/media/File:Democracy_Index_2019.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#/media/File:De...
- kazagistar 6y ago
  The economist is a very dubious source for defining "democracy", given their hyperliberal free market ideology that, for example, believes that vast corruption of media for the interests of the wealthy is good and normal. Its a media empire founded in supporting slavery and imerialism, and hasn't changed much.
  - dash2 6y ago
    It’s not a media empire (that’s Pearson, if the FT and Economist are an “empire”), it wasn’t founded to support slavery (wrong by about 50 years for the UK, and supported the Union in the Civil War, https://www.economist.com/united-states/1865/04/22/the-fall-of-richmond-and-its-effect-upon-english-commerce https://www.economist.com/united-states/1865/04/22/the-fall-...) and I doubt very much it has ever claimed anything like “vast media corruption is good and normal”. Please don’t post without doing basic fact-checking.