What would it mean for the world if the US were to transform itself from the usual democracy-like plutocracy into an outright dictatorship? Would anything change at all?
Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds:
But a real socialism, it is argued, would be controlled by the workers themselves through direct participation instead of being run by Leninists, Stalinists, Castroites, or other ill-willed, power-hungry, bureaucratic cabals of evil men who betray revolutions. Unfortunately, this “pure socialism” view is ahistorical and nonfalsifiable; it cannot be tested against the actualities of history. It compares an ideal against an imperfect reality, and the reality comes off a poor second. It imagines what socialism would be like in a world far better than this one, where no strong state structure or security force is required, where none of the value produced by workers needs to be expropriated to rebuild society and defend it from invasion and internal sabotage.
The pure socialists’ ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.
The pure socialists had a vision of a new society that would create and be created by new people, a society so transformed in its fundaments as to leave little opportunity for wrongful acts, corruption, and criminal abuses of state power. There would be no bureaucracy or self-interested coteries, no ruthless conflicts or hurtful decisions. When the reality proves different and more difficult, some on the Left proceed to condemn the real thing and announce that they “feel betrayed” by this or that revolution.
People could form their own communes that best reflects their values and stay united under a federation of some sorts for defense against the inevitable bourgeois aggression.
Perhaps that is what the USSR could have been.
Maybe next time.
As a European, I can't see any difference. It is true that Bush junior - just like his father - shamelessly exploited his supremacy to bring Iraq under his control, but I don't see what has changed since then.
I don't think there's a previous period to compare it to. The US has gone through isolationist periods before (eg 1930s) but never dictatorship.
Just wait a year or two and find out.
Tourism and business travels would probably take a hit.
Europeans still summered at the beach in Spain under Franco.
Some would still come, but much less. I personally have chosen to avoid travel in USA during trump 1. I would again if things get crazy. I know that Australia, for instance, lists USA as risky for gun violence and demonstrations. It particularly calls out election and inauguration as to be avoided. It's still noted as safe, but not as safe as Australia due to general violent crime. https://www.smartraveller.gov.au/destinations/americas/united-states-america
Why is that?
The American brand still has a lot of value and a lot of American exports are tied to that brand. A large part of that brand is Freedom™. If the USA were to go full fascist, that brand is fucked.
There is also the idea that part of America's media strength is based on a free market for cultural output. A fascist America would likely not have the ability to pump out the quality of media that it did before due to government censors.
America exports a lot of tourism dollars and that'd likely come grinding to a halt.
There would be less noise on the internet every 4 years.
That's about it.
There's plenty of historical precedents of democratic countries becoming authocratic. The Weimar republic, for example.
That's right. And the US is well on its way. It is unfortunately almost an exact copy of historical events.
Better make sure the capitol in DC has fire supression.
It's wild to me that liberals and leftists were both aware of the path that Weimar took towards facism and the liberals decided to use that knowledge to pressure the leftists to hold their nose to vote w them anyways (just as it happened in the Weimar) and the leftist refused (also just like what happened in the Weimar) and now we're in this situation w trump.
It makes me believe that; at some future state; the liberals will likewise believe that they can force the leftist to kowtow to their platform to the same disastrous results and it makes me wonder if the left wing of politics will permanently do this dance of the liberals perpetually trying to force the leftists into unwillingly accept their platform despite it not happening no matter how much they push for it and I also wonder if the liberals will ever learn this lesson as well of the lessons from 2016 and 2024 that they will never be able to pressure the leftists into accepting thier platform.
The fact that the Democrats continue to insist that they lost this election because they went too woke makes me believe that this will happen at least one more time; assuming that there will be another time.
give it a few years. were about to find out
Depends on your demographics a bit. Dictatorships like to scapegoat ethnic minorities or other out groups (see Pinochet's, Mao's, Pol Pot's, etc extermination of scientists and educators) for society's problems. These groups of people tend to experience much greater intensity of oppression under dictatorships than already present in the US. This tends to change culture on a fundamental level because most people actively try to fit in with the in group to avoid becoming a target themselves.
While present to some degree in our current system, another core characteristic of dictatorships is that self enrichment for those in power is the primary driving factor for decision making. Dictators don't need to pay lip service to making decisions for the greater good. You see this especially prominently in dictatorships in developing countries with valuable resources... The dictators and their close friends take all of the wealth from resource extraction for themselves and everyone else lives in extreme poverty. Yes we have wealth inequality already, but it would be accelerated even more. You could see even highly skilled professionals having a hard time making ends meet (or in jail for being too smart and having "ideas"), and even more homelessness, potentially even wide scale famine.
In terms of geopolitics... Our relationship with allies would become about how the relationship personally benefits those in power.
If the US became an international bad actor the first crisis to resolve would likely be the outsized environmental impact America has. I'm pretty sure the rest of the world could sanction America into oblivion due to how unnecessary American exports are but it'd put China in an unrivaled power position.
It'd really fucking suck but that may be where we're headed.
If the US became an international bad actor
If the US became an international bad actor
🌎 🧑🚀 🔫 🧑🚀
Likely more introverted and make the world a better place for most but Canada and Mexico might be in trouble. Eg here in Australia you'd hope we kick all the US bases out of Australia, which were a bad fucking idea in the first place.
The externalising of the shit show of inevitable consequence of being a dictatorship might be a neighbiir issue eg instead of just rhetoric about those damn immigrants, invade Mexico to sure up the borders. One hopes the rest of the world would rally behind Mexico, except perhaps like minded "bros" like Russia, Hungary, North korea, Vietnam, Camboida, Myanmar etc etc.
Not much change in the big US agendas: Wars to protect and expand oil use, and now tech monopoly to control colonial democracies.
Democracy is significantly easier to create an Israel first or US first rulership in the world. It just takes a little bit of money. Media is desperate to ally with oligarchy/zionism, and an even tinier bit of money achieves that. CIA can JFK any politician that doesn't accept their money, and NGOs to foment insurrection "for liberal democratic values" are simply NGOs to foment US sponsored war and destabilization of their lives.
The only possible change would be a military coup of the US that disrupts "Israel first" rule, and oligarchist/corporatist warmongering meant to diminish Americans and other humans. Less democracy doesn't mean less corruption and subjugation. Georgia successfully resisted a suicidal path earlier this year, to the dismay of "US approved democracy" demonic forces.
People are too dumb with too little concern to inform/care about making the right democratic choices. They pick one of the heroes their media tells them to pick, and rely on empty promises made by the heroes.
Depends on whether the dictatorship is competent or incompetent. Businesses need years of lead time to negotiate deals, build factories, make a profit. But they can't make plans for the future with a government that is run by idiots. That's a guaranteed money-loser.