What data do you have to support the position that "democracy ultimately is still doing its job. " further what "job" do you believe democracy is doing.
I can point to many data points that show it is not, the for mentioned lack of accountability. The fact that most of the voting population does not even vote. I can point to research studies like that from political scientists Martin Gilens and Benjamin Paige [1] that shows Average citizens have little impact on public policy. I have all kinds of data, and clear examples in history to support my position, I would be interested in seeing a counter offer
[1] https://pnhp.org/news/gilens-and-page-average-citizens-have-...
Have you seen journalists attacking a dictatorship while living there, and go unpunished? Have you seen the same, but on democratic countries?
That should answer it.
Now you could argue that he still did a good thing, and perhaps that would have been taken into account by the jury in what would have been a proper trial in a civilian court had he not left the country.
None of the journalists who reported on those leaks were imprisoned or harmed. In fact, those on beats that require them to have accreditation to the White House, Pentagon, etc still have that accreditation.
This is fundamentally and vastly different to what happens to journalists in China, Russia, and similarly authoritarian states.
"National Security" is often used to cover up government abuse, the public only knows of a few rare instances of this abuse and based on those I can pretty much assume the abuses are FAR FAR more extensive than has been reveled to the public and there is great incentive by government to classify everything to ensure there is never any accountability. Just look at the actions around these JFK files that multiple administrations have tried to declassify, or the Torture report that clearly the CIA violated the law even during the investigation
You must have immense trust, not backed by any rational data to support that trust, to proclaim Snowden an enemy of the people simply because he violated state secrets laws, laws that IMO should be unconstitutional in the first place, and are completely antithetical to a functional democracy.
If the government can keep secrets from the voters, then the voters can not hold them accountable, it is as simple as that
> perhaps the illusion not actually being an illusion is what keeps it alive
After Glenn Greenwald reported on the 2013 leaks, the IC and news media started up a bunch of threats of treason and were questioning his status as a journalist (to make him more legally at fault)
This doesn't necessarily contradict your statement, given we state the obvious that the US govt (and executive agencies especially) are not democratic
You mean like Kashoggi, right?
Is it tho? Is it worse than Cisco or bcci? What about CryptoAG? Instagram and Meta literary have got shadow profiles on near every single person on the planet....
I'm sure the us would love an EU/UK with private health care and weaker unions and labor laws.
Democracy is good, yes, but blindly asserting that USA == democracy is an incredibly naive, elementary school textbook level take of how our society propagates itself (not saying you're asserting this, but addressing the hypothetical point)
It's rocket fuel for demagogues, who swoop in and exploit it and turbocharge it even more (see Trump). They say the old system isn't working, they promise to disrupt it. The old rules aren't working anymore, give me all the power, I alone can fix it.
I had a much larger post, but I'm going to only respond to this one now, because it sums up basically off the disagreements and no further discussion is going to resolve anything.
I don't agree with this sort of cynicism at all, and I very much do believe that while it is very flawed, democracy ultimately is still doing its job.