I'm not saying other countries are perfect, including the US.
But there's a difference. The US is not living up to its ideals of equality and democracy, or even equal treatement under the law (e.g. lying to congress about not "collecting" data about US citizens). The UK is not even aspiriting to living up to those standards.
For example take torture. The best way to paint this is to "do horrible things for the protection of freedom and democracy". It's Realpolitik.
I'm still absolutely against torture, but it's a difference in kind to the UK putting religious clergy into positions of government power.
It's possible to defend torture as an instrumental goal to the ultimate goal of freedom & democracy. But the UK is not aiming for the same ultimate goal.
Similarly it's a difference in kind when Trump or Bolsanaro practice nepotism, compared to when some asshat gets a peerage in the UK.
We can list flaws all day, but the difference between the US and the UK here is that the US really does have an ideal of equality, freedom, and democracy, and the UK does not. The UK has not outgrown the Monarchy. And I'm not just talking about the royal family, but the whole aristocracy.
Another way to explain this: If you tell the story of Plebgate to an American, they won't fully get it. It's an insult, yes, but merely saying it's an insult is missing the point. It's bad because the class society is still there. People owning their homes often still literally pay a land tax to someone with a lord title. A land Lord.
It's a step on the spectrum to Saudi Arabia, where within its borders every grain of sand, and every person, is the personal property of the king.
If you take the US and add a permanent unelected head of state, add 20 dedicated priest posts to the senate, remove the first, second, fourth, and fifth amendment, and on top of that have a society that generally feels like this is a good idea, then you have a completely different country.
And it's not a country that even aspires to be as free or democratic as the US. And since the UK doesn't try, it also isn't.
Under Trump we saw that the US institutions were (mostly) holding. What's being "held" in the UK is not even a goal on the level of the US.
You point out many things. And probably those kinds of things the US has done more than Saudi Arabia has done. But nobody would therefore conclude that Saudi Arabia is more freedom&democracy than the US, would they?
But there's a difference. The US is not living up to its ideals of equality and democracy, or even equal treatement under the law (e.g. lying to congress about not "collecting" data about US citizens). The UK is not even aspiriting to living up to those standards.
For example take torture. The best way to paint this is to "do horrible things for the protection of freedom and democracy". It's Realpolitik.
I'm still absolutely against torture, but it's a difference in kind to the UK putting religious clergy into positions of government power.
It's possible to defend torture as an instrumental goal to the ultimate goal of freedom & democracy. But the UK is not aiming for the same ultimate goal.
Similarly it's a difference in kind when Trump or Bolsanaro practice nepotism, compared to when some asshat gets a peerage in the UK.
We can list flaws all day, but the difference between the US and the UK here is that the US really does have an ideal of equality, freedom, and democracy, and the UK does not. The UK has not outgrown the Monarchy. And I'm not just talking about the royal family, but the whole aristocracy.
Another way to explain this: If you tell the story of Plebgate to an American, they won't fully get it. It's an insult, yes, but merely saying it's an insult is missing the point. It's bad because the class society is still there. People owning their homes often still literally pay a land tax to someone with a lord title. A land Lord.
It's a step on the spectrum to Saudi Arabia, where within its borders every grain of sand, and every person, is the personal property of the king.
If you take the US and add a permanent unelected head of state, add 20 dedicated priest posts to the senate, remove the first, second, fourth, and fifth amendment, and on top of that have a society that generally feels like this is a good idea, then you have a completely different country.
And it's not a country that even aspires to be as free or democratic as the US. And since the UK doesn't try, it also isn't.
Under Trump we saw that the US institutions were (mostly) holding. What's being "held" in the UK is not even a goal on the level of the US.
You point out many things. And probably those kinds of things the US has done more than Saudi Arabia has done. But nobody would therefore conclude that Saudi Arabia is more freedom&democracy than the US, would they?