The Countries Most (& Least) Satisfied With 'Democracy'

Tyler Durden's picture

Across the globe, the spread of right- and left-wing populism and authoritarian politics have shaken the very foundations of democracy.

As Statista's Niall McCarthy notes, a new survey from Pew Research has found that people across the globe are generally unhappy with the functionality of their political systems, though levels of satisfaction with democracy vary hugely between countries.

As can be seen from the following infographic which shows a selection of countries from the survey, people in India have tremendous faith in democracy. 79 percent of those polled said they are satisfied with the way democracy is working in India compared to 11 percent who are dissatisfied. Germany also recorded a high level (73 percent) of satisfaction with democracy.

Infographic: The Countries Most & Least Satisfied With Democracy  | Statista

You will find more statistics at Statista

In many other developed countries, however, faith is waning.

In the United Kingdom and Japan, 47 percent of people are not satisfied with how democracy is working in their countries while in the U.S., that rises to 51 percent. France, South Korea and Brazil all recorded dissatisfaction levels of 65 percent or higher... but Greece tops the charts with only 21% of its citizenry 'satisfied' with the weay democracy is working.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mr. Pain's picture

USA is not a democracy but a republic.


As far as democracy goes, in the USA its meaningless. One asshole politician is the same as the next. They do what they want to do and are not representing the people who handed them their position of trust. They are all for themselves.

Fuck these people.

zimboe's picture

Are you a Folder or a Wadder? You sound like a goddam commie Wadder.

beemasters's picture

Greeks are the least satisfied. The irony!

Paul Kersey's picture

Having never lived under a democracy in the U.S., I can only say that I am not happy, but have learned to survive, living under a klepto-corporatocracy that has devolved into a kakistocracy.

doctor10's picture

"Open Society" also known as "Soros' sovereignity destruction project" is merely sowing the seeds for planetary corprorate/banker regional management of the peons and peasants.

One gross "management" technique is the total corruption of any "functioning" democracy/republic.  They have the resources to fuck up anybody/any country they choose.

Putin had the common sense to ban them. He recognizes 21st century Bolshevism for what it is

LittleGreenMan's picture

In addition to practical considerations, our Republic was intentionally designed as a representative government, rather than a democracy, in order to allow the ruling class to make the tough decisions for the average citizen.  That structure may or may not have had honest motivations; regardless, we now have the technology to implement a 100% pure Democracy.  One person, one vote.  That could be good enough to keep us from collapsing for another 100 years or so.  Drain the swamp.

Byte Me's picture

Basically, your republic was set up as a Plutocracy. It was indeed as far as we can divine, set up with the noblest of intentions, but just as cream floats to the top, so does shit.

Democracy was never a founding issue. It got 'inserted' as a 'good idea' later on.

MisterMousePotato's picture

The numbers for France are interesting.

Two-thirds of the French are dissatisfied with their government, and yet, without fail, they vote for the same assholes and asshole policies.

For fuck's sake, when the fuck are fucking people going to fucking try something fucking different?!?

paperstreetsoapco's picture

Democracy, or as you say, "one person, one vote", is MOB RULE.


If we were left to the machinations of democracy, the metropolitan population centers would ALWAYS rule.


So you would like new York, Los Angeles, & Shitcago to write our laws?  Even if you add Houston, the population inside Houston city limits is full of Obamas sons.  So you'll lose again.




roddy6667's picture

100% democracy will always turn into the worst kind of socialism.

There are more lazy people than hard workers.

There are more wasters than savers.

They will always vote for their personal short-sighted gains vs. long term benefits to themselves or society in general. That's how America got into the mess it is. 

You wouldn't trust a large segment of Americans to wash your car or mow your lawn, but you want them to be part of the process of running the country? Why?  

MoreFreedom's picture

When democracy devolves into cannibals voting on who's for dinner, it's not long before people aren't happy about voting. 

When the national government is limited to only protecting people from others who'd harm them, then people aren't using government to try and steal from each other, and instead are responsible for themselves and as a result enjoy the fruits of freedom. What people can vote for, is limited as well, so they can't vote to use government to steal for their own desires (including the desire to take from some for the benefit of others).

not dead yet's picture

Let us not forget the US is the land of the free. Free for the rich and connected while the rest of us are free as long as we stay under the radar, if we can. In a really free country they don't strip search you for drugs and steal your money because you don't come to a complete stop at the stop sign. Or the guy with the suitcase full of fentynal who got caught for only looking suspicious not that he broke any laws. In California one can get a year in jail and fined for using the pronoun when dealing with certain groups but a cop can pull you over for nothing and rob you blind and they throw a party back at the station with your money. Same for the IRS.

what happened's picture


Or a physician can call the DCF if you bring your child in for a baseball accident as I know happened to one parent or use any number of excuses to kidnap "legally".  Norway is the only developed country who announced yesterday that it would stop kidnapping children after it happened to the daughter of one of the ministers.

We are doing this in our own country, and every other country you can name in the developed world to support pensions and health care for government workers.

nufio's picture

holy shit! that article about norway is unbelievable. 

with guns so freely available in the US, does that shit really happen here?

if kids are taken away from parents, it really gets them to a "nothing to lose" scenario. How the fuck do they feel safe doing that shit?



Ghordius's picture

"USA is not a democracy but a republic"

it's both... and a corporate layer on top, exploiting an oldfashioned electoral system, which, paired with "either Angels or Devils, there are only two choices, either you are with the Black Hats or with the White Hats, choose" propaganda puts everything in the hands of.... Money

that cage... exists. it's in your mind, though. the most... effective place

Escrava Isaura's picture

US is not a democracy because capitalism and democracy are not comparable.


AssN9's picture

Replace capitalism with corporatism and you might be onto something.

Escrava Isaura's picture

Corporatism is an extension of capitalism as local commerce was.

My father and his brothers and sister owned some grocery stores, fast-food restaurants, and few other things in our city, in Brazil back in the 60’s and 70’s. I don’t ever remember ever hearing the word capitalism. Commerce was the word that they used.

As far as I remember, at least the food, vegetable, meat, fruits were all local grown. They would sell these products through their commerce.

The customers that didn’t have enough money they still would sell to them by entering the amount on a ledger and the customer would come and pay when they got paid on the end of the month. There were no interest rate or any type of fees.

There were no credit cards. All transactions were cash. Some people could write checks, but just few.

Now you go there and is very different. Those small business are gone. Huge supermarkets is what you see. Most people don’t carry cash. All done electronic, meaning through banks.

Corporatism is local business ‘commerce’ in steroids.

Commerce and black-markets don’t lead to huge inequality. However, capitalism has a top-down hierarchy, and it leads to inequality.

My experience is that commerce doesn’t lead to too much. It’s pretty mediocre compared to when I came to America. Capitalism is a total different ball game.

My point is: Humanity will be better off by having local commerce and local currencies and not capitalism and industrialization of the means or production.

But capitalism and industrialization is what most of the world has. They were the winners.


chestergimli's picture

I have read one person's opinion who said that capitalism is Jewish usury.

chestergimli's picture

I have read one person's opinion who said that capitalism is Jewish usury.

roddy6667's picture

Apples and oranges. Capitalism is a form of economics. Democracy is a form of government.

Paul Kersey's picture

"there are only two choices, either you are with the Black Hats or with the White Hats"

There are no choices, because under the black and white hats, which exist only in the eyes of the beholders, are the bald heads of Deep State. Democracy in the U.S. is an illusion, and voting is a useless ritual.

French Bloke's picture

Ghordius, why do you say there are only 2 choices in the USSA? We all know know there are other parties - or do they not count as choices in the globalist book?

Tech support Geoff's picture

It all started to go to hell after the civil war, as we started to cast aside nearly everything mentioned in the constitution. First, men without land could vote for the senator, then a congressman, then disgrunteled freed blacks, then women got to vote at the behest of the far left, then Mexicans amnesty, soon we'll be a direct democracy that will probably last all of a decade before micro states forum within it.

bobsmith5's picture

It was a republic when it started. A republic is a form of government where the people are the supreme authority and in total control of it. Where those who SERVE as it's administrators are elected democratically by a majority voting for them and laws are enacted by a democratic majority of those representatives who were elected.

We are no longer a democratic constitutional republic. We are a socialist fascist corporatocracy hybrid with a strong emphasis on corporate control.

roddy6667's picture

It hasn't been a republic for at least 75 years. It doesn't matter what is written in the Constitution. That hasn't been followed for a long time.

Bigly's picture

Yes. I am getting sick of people, including in our govt, who refuse to acknowledge that we are supposed to be a republic. And understand the differences  of each as well.

johnduncan78's picture

Just think-if we were a democracy, Hillary woould be pres.........................................

lincolnsteffens's picture

@Mr. Pain,

I feel your pain. You are absolutely correct. The People have continually been dumbed down through the Federalization of the education system. Most countries are increasingly run by compromised public office holders that just lie and are complicit in an ever expanding control over people's daily lives. The very same people  that are handed the invoice to further support their subjugation are kept in a dream world by rhetoric and mind control bombardment in the mass media.

People are too deluded to understand they have nearly lost their Democratic Republic. They blame their losses on democracy when they have lost it through their own ignorance. All people know is that it is not working and are grasping at anything touted as an improvement.

divingengineer's picture

In the USA one unelected judge can overrule 30 million voters based solely on his own political dogma.
Now that’s Democrazy.

JDFX's picture

Well done UK ,  colonisation leaves it's lasting benefits if installed properly !  Canada, India, Australia. You're welcome.



Ghordius's picture

Churchill had a good quip on democracy. the worst system ever... except for all others

Escrava Isaura's picture

A democracy is subordinate to the will of the majority, otherwise it's an OLIGARCHY.

Churchill is correct by saying that democracy is  better than "all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." 


AnarchistRex's picture

It is always oligarchy. Democracy is merely a layer applied to a political system to keep the lower class from rebelling by giving them a small seat at the table... a very small seat in most cases.

Escrava Isaura's picture

The only form of democracy that you probably find in earth is with the Aboriginal Australians. Even them is questionable, because of the Anglos-Saxons interferences.

It’s impossible to have a true democracy in a industrial society, because industrialization enable the population to overgrow their environments. Industrialization just left the planet with too many people, and these people living longer lifecycles.

Democracy under these conditions is totally unworkable.



Bigly's picture

That's why we are a constitutional republic,


lincolnsteffens's picture

Yeah, almost no one understand what a constitutional republic is. Many of those in power understand this quite well and have developed a very good system to steal from the rest.

Start with the end of central banks.

Ghordius's picture

"It is always oligarchy. Democracy is..."

the freedom to vote... or not. the freedom to inform yourself... or not. the freedom to join political parties... or not

yes, in the very best case, it's still an oligarchy of those who participate... versus those who don't

in China, the Communist Party leads. one million with a Party Membership, one billion without

they don't call it an oligarchy, they call it a... Vanguard, an "Avant Guarde"

divingengineer's picture

That small seat at the table provided a pretty good life for a family of four when I was a kid.
Now it qualifies you for food stamps and a prescription card for opioid painkillers.

smacker's picture

The definition of "majority" is important here.

In my lifetime there has never been an elected British government which achieved a majority of the popular vote (50%+1). 41-44% is rather typical. It's the political party that wins the most ((seats)) who win an election and govern. Even HRH Tony Blair with his so-called landslide victory in the 1997 election only achieved somewhere around 44% of the popular vote but a huge majority of seats.

Seats are based upon constituencies which are a man-made construct. The UK Electoral Commission goes thru a process from time to time to balance constituencies with voting numbers but it is far from perfect.

This means that no post war British government has ever governed by the will of the majority of the people, only by a majority of seats. We are therefore governed by a minority of the people. In your words that makes Britain an oligarchy and since many important policies of all parties are little different, voting only makes a difference at the edges. The conduct of the Security Services (MI5, MI6, GCHQ, Met Police and SAS hit squads) do not change whichever party wins power.


Ghordius's picture

typical. you describe the symptoms, but not the cause

First Past The Post. aka "The Winner Takes It All"

with your (British) system, Merkel's CDU would have had "a landslide victory", this year in Germany's federal elections

smacker's picture

Nope, I described the voting system in the UK which some people, such as yourself, claim to be the symptom of a problem.

Dictatorship by the minority is what we have.

Your suggestion is that it would be better if we had some sort of proportional representation system where winning 43% of the popular vote was not enough to govern. At first parse that seems to be better except that it would create a lot of backroom wheeling and dealing between political parties (like we see in Germany and elsewhere) with them levelling down to reach compromises etc. Mediocrity takes over.

A better solution would be to outlaw socialism altogether!

But the best solution would be to introduce a strong written Constitution and Bill of Rights which placed large sectors of society completely out of bounds for government to meddle with at all. In this case, the voting system used would matter a whole lot less and ((my life)) would not be dictated by a minority government.

alt-center's picture

The best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with an average voter.

JohnGaltUk's picture

They only start to think when they feel the pain, when they lose their house, their pensions, their jobs.... by that time the robbers have made off with the loot.

Ghordius's picture

true, but not completely so

that's specifically when people that never voted before head for the polls

and... they usually vote for a new set of robbers... who's promises sounds of fury

scaffold's picture

The worst system? How do we know? Do you really think there is demokracy anywhere in the world?

Ghordius's picture

in it's pure form? no. that experiment ended with ancient Athen's empire
democracy, pure, is poisonous anyway. and it killed Socrates

democracy has to be tempered. with a constitution, with checks and balances, with processes, etc. etc.

you can't live without salt. eat a spoon of salt at once, and you'll... die

Moderation is the Queen of Virtues. without her, the others don't work

roddy6667's picture

In ancient Athens, probably less than 10% of the population was allowed to vote. Is this considered democracy? Those allowed to vote were the wealthy landowners. In other words, a plutocracy, what exists now in America.

Ghordius's picture

it was the same set that had to show up armed for battle, after voting for it

with the very rich riding a horse, and bearing more risks, and the simply rich having the better battle kit, and so in the front line, again bearing more risks

in a plutocracy, the very rich aren't in any line. they are up that hill, having a picnic and watching the battle

yvhmer's picture

Your first two questions raise interesting perspectives.