Tydligen. Många videor på den här YouTube-kanalen är ovanligt humoristiska, men det verkar vara en riktig medial eller spiritualistisk kanal?!
Synkroniserade nuffror har jag ju sett halva livet (11:11 är en klassiker) och ovanligt mycket rådjur det senaste året eller så. Annars kan jag inte säga att jag vibrerar på samma frekvens som Christoffer Norén...
I´ve got these strange dreams, man!
Since the United States is often regarded as "the world´s first modern democracy", I asked ChatGPT about it and got the following (very balanced!) response...
Short form: it´s a tie between the United States and France. No surprise there, to be honest. But what about the Netherlands? Then, ChatGPT revised its response and included the Batavian Republic (1795) in its short-list of early modern democracies. It seems we´re back were we started with the "AI"...
It´s still a dumb machine that has to prompted to give you the "right" answers.
What nation could be considered "the first modern democracy"? What nation was the first with universal male suffrage?
There isn’t a single uncontested answer to either question, because it depends a lot on what counts as “modern democracy” and what counts as “universal male suffrage.” But the short version is:
Here is the cleaner breakdown.
Why people say this:
Why this answer is incomplete:
So if someone says “the first modern democracy was the United States,” they usually mean:
the first durable large-scale modern constitutional representative republic that became a major democratic model.
Why:
Why it is complicated:
So France is a strong candidate if by “first modern democracy” you mean:
the first major state to proclaim popular sovereignty and near-universal male political citizenship in a recognizably modern way.
Why:
Why it usually isn’t called the first modern democracy:
Britain is central to the history of parliamentary government, cabinet government, and constitutional monarchy. But it generally was not the first modern democracy because:
Britain is crucial for the history of liberal constitutionalism and parliamentarism, but not usually the best answer to “first modern democracy.”
It depends on the standard:
then the usual answer is the United States.
then revolutionary France is a very strong answer.
then honestly none of the late-18th-century candidates fully qualify, because all excluded major parts of the population.
So my own concise formulation would be:
The United States is often called the first modern democracy in the sense of being the first durable large-scale constitutional representative republic, while revolutionary France is often the strongest claimant if one emphasizes popular sovereignty and universal male suffrage.
This also needs a definition.
The key issue is whether you mean:
During the French Revolution, elections to the National Convention in 1792 are usually treated as one of the first major cases—arguably the first national case in a modern state—of universal male suffrage (at least in principle for adult men, without property qualifications).
That is why France is so important in this story.
Still, if you ask:
a very standard answer is:
France, during the Revolution, especially 1792.
The French Revolution of 1848 established universal male suffrage in a more stable and administratively modern form under the French Second Republic.
That is why many historians treat 1848 France as a landmark:
So if the question is:
then France in 1848 is one of the best answers.
Yes—depending on how strict you are.
There were earlier cases of very broad male political participation in places like:
But these often fail one of the tests:
Some 19th-century Latin American constitutions were, on paper, quite broad in suffrage, and in some cases earlier than parts of Europe in removing property qualifications. But the details are complicated because literacy, dependency, military status, or local political realities often narrowed the electorate.
So they are important in the broader history, but the most standard “first” answer still tends to be France.
If you want the safest historically defensible summary, I’d put it like this:
If you forced me to give the most defensible compact answer, I’d say:
The United States is often regarded as the first modern democracy in the constitutional-republican sense, while France was the pioneering state for universal male suffrage, first in revolutionary form in 1792 and more durably in 1848.
If you want, I can do a country-by-country timeline of suffrage expansion from 1776 to 1920—US, France, Britain, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, and the major Latin American republics—so you can see exactly where each one sits on the spectrum of “modern democracy."
A short "4th of July video" about crazy Americans literally hunting alleged monstrous creatures. Well, or allegedly hunting them...
I never heard of the White River Monster in Arkansas before, nor of the Green (and slimy) Bigfoot! Note that many locations in the US have laws against hunting cryptids, probably because of problems with private citizens misusing their Second Amendment rights...
I mean, dude.
Even so, congratulations to your Semiquincentennial!
Aftonbladets Anders Lindberg vill ha en nordisk förbundsstat. LOL! Be careful what you wish for, tror inte att du vill ha en Nordische Bundesstaat dominerad av Danmark. Du vet, deras invandringspolitik...
Planen är kanhända att den ska domineras av Sverige! Eller?
Fast lite roligt är det ju att den gamle sossekoryfén plötsligt låter som en nationalist. Han citerar t.o.m. nationalsången. Det hela blir ännu roligare om man betänker att Lindberg är en rent usel stilist. En stor del av artikeln är skriven på det där infantiliserade kvasi-talspråket som Aftonbladet verkar älska.
Lär dig högsvenska, Anders. Eller danska...
Taylor Swift´s silence on the recent fall of Kostiantynivka is not a little damning, and given the extremely serious nature of the present geopolitical situation, entirely disqualifying!
 |
| Credit: Ranveig (?) |
The Catholic Church has excommunicated the SSPX. Not sure why most news outlets spin this as "Vatican excommunicates six bishops". Ahem, no, read the rest of the declaration for crying out loud. Everyone associated with the SSPX, including lay people, are excommunicated. Since the SSPX is a priestly association, this presumably means that lay *sympathizers* of the group are also to be cast out. How are they identified? Perhaps by regular attendance at an SSPX chapel.
So it´s not six people. It´s more like 60,000 people. Or whatever the number might be.
I assume the (rather fickle) love affair between conservatives and Pope Leo is definitely over now. Not that I care, tbh. SSPX aren´t exactly my guys. Either.
I didn´t know some American Catholics claimed George Washington. He supposedly converted to the Catholic Church on his death bed. Evidence? "Oral tradition" from Washington´s Black slaves and some others (see one of the comments in the commentary section). In other words: no evidence.
Please move on.
Oh, and the Black slaves are referred to as "enslaved people" in curiously colorblind fashion...
Today is the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States. Apparently. The "bourgeois" revolution was "progressive" for its time. And...here we are.
Goodbye!
Eagerly awaiting the next round in the recent ("recent") drama between "Professor" Dave and Dan "Dedunking". I know, I know. I´m a sinner. As in guilty pleasure. Might have karmic consequences later!
