Or access to information increased?

Or I’ve gotten older and more sour on this type of stuff?

Honestly I feel like the change has been, for me, more awareness and less attachement to the narrative forced down my throat. I also don’t believe it to be (as a native US citizen) a US thing. I see it in a huge swing in many countries towards authoritarianism in many ways and towards many goals. It isn’t so much a left or right thing (although I believe it to be more right leaning) but just a greater willingness to use power structures to control others.

Neither. The concept of "spreading democracy" has always been propaganda, and the US has not faced harsher standards.

The US brought democracy to Germany and Japan after WW2.

Germany was a republic with a constitution and elected leaders after 1918.

Kaiser Wilhelm II took power after Bismark, and abdicated at the end of the first war. Wilhelm died in 1941.

Bismarck unified Germany in the latter 1800's as a constitutional federation with suffrage and elected legislatures, I don't know the fine details except it was some form of confederation and is considered a constitutional monarchy with elected legislature.

For a guy who can cite names and dates you show very weak understanding of history.

Technically both Belarus and Russia area also democratic countries. Both countries have this written in their constitutions.

Germany had 12 years of dictatorship from 1933 to 1945.

And most elements of the regime, excluding a few people at the very top, remained in place after 1945. Like the judiciary, municipal authorities, government bureaucracies etc. - and of course the large company owners.

That is true and one of the few successful examples. I wonder if the cold war played a role here, there was an honest ambition not to let Germany fall to the communits.

The US propped up a war criminal in Japan ensuring fifty years of one party rule.

I mean ok, but the parent commenter's claim is that the US is _losing_ standing as a spreader of democracy. This is the premise of my question, and I'm not really interested in a random third-party's view that the premise is wrong, especially when it's as trite a view as this one.

You are asking if people think the propaganda has become less true. It's a nonsense question, as if people ever think the US is/was spreading democracy the propaganda has worked.

It doesn't matter if it is happening more or less. The goal is to always be improving.

Values is about what you believe in and strive for, and when you don't reach the standards you set for yourself, you figure out why, and adjust to be inline with your beliefs and goals.

> It doesn't matter if it is happening more or less. The goal is to always be improving.

These two statements seem to be at odds. In order to know if we're improving, we have to know if the behavior is becoming more frequent or less.

That's a good point. I meant that we don't want to only look at the past and compare if we are better or worse, but rather focus on always improving.

> It doesn't matter if it is happening more or less. The goal is to always be improving.

I'm not sure what you think "mattering" means, but I was responding to a comment that said "the US is loosing[sic] more and more of its standing". I'm not sure why you're so convinced that the relative decline of the US's reputation shouldn't be talked about, but it's pretty bizarre behavior to insert yourself into a conversation about it and assert so.

> Is there any indication that stuff like this happens _more_ than in the past? Or have the world's standards just risen?

Oh, so it is fine to sin against democracy as long as you are not sinning more than in the past?