Those who associate freedom more strongly with political participation, direct democracy, and broad party pluralism are more likely to look toward Switzerland.

Image AI-generated

Washington/Bern – Since the end of the Second World War, the United States has been regarded as the political and military center of the free world. The term “Leader of the Free World” was particularly shaped during the Cold War and represented the contrast between Western liberal democracies and authoritarian systems. Yet in light of growing criticism of American institutions, an increasingly pressing question arises: is the leadership role of the United States still self-evident?

The debate touches not only on foreign policy, yet also on the fundamental question of what constitutes a democracy.

Two Different Models of Freedom

The United States and Switzerland embody two distinct democratic traditions.

The American Constitution of 1787 emerged from a deep mistrust of state power. Its aim was to limit government and protect individual rights. Separation of powers, federalism, and the Bill of Rights were designed to prevent a majority from exercising unrestricted control over minorities.

Switzerland, by contrast, places greater emphasis on the principle of popular sovereignty. Through popular initiatives since 1891, citizens can directly intervene in political decision-making. While the American model seeks to protect individual freedom from the power of the state, the Swiss model understands political participation itself as an expression of freedom.

The Problem of the American Two-Party System

A central point of criticism of the U.S. system is the de facto dominance of Democrats and Republicans. Although other parties such as the Green Party or the Libertarian Party exist, they have little chance of gaining power at the national level due to the majoritarian electoral system and high institutional barriers.

Critics see this as a limitation of political pluralism. Democracy, they argue, does not only mean that citizens are allowed to vote, yet also that they can choose between realistic political alternatives.

The American system often leads voters not necessarily to support their preferred party, yet to make a strategic choice between two major camps. By contrast, many European proportional representation systems allow smaller parties to enter parliaments and give greater weight to diverse political currents.

Everyone Is Guilty

The question of media visibility for smaller parties is particularly controversial.

In the United States, political coverage is heavily concentrated on the two major parties. Critics argue that this creates a cycle: less media exposure leads to lower public recognition, weaker polling numbers, and in turn even less attention.

The Green Party and other third parties have long complained that they are largely absent from national debates and major media formats. Supporters of the current system counter that media primarily report on parties that, given the electoral system and voter support, actually have a realistic chance of governing.

The opposing view, however, is that media also shape political reality themselves. Those who are not visible can hardly gain support.

Parallels to International Debates on Democracy

This discussion echoes criticisms raised in other countries as well. During the 2023 Turkish presidential elections, for example, international observers criticized the fact that opposition candidate Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu had significantly less access to state media than incumbent Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

The common core of these criticisms is the question of fair political competition: is it sufficient that parties are formally allowed to run, or must they also have a realistic opportunity to communicate their messages to the public?

Guantánamo, ICE, and the Promise of Freedom

American security and immigration policies have also strained the country’s self-image as a symbol of freedom.

The detention facility at Guantánamo Bay has been internationally criticized for indefinite detention and controversial interrogation methods. The immigration authority ICE has faced criticism over certain measures such as large-scale deportation campaigns and family separations.

Supporters argue that every state has the right to ensure security and protect its borders. Critics, however, see this as a contradiction to America’s claim to stand for freedom and human rights worldwide.

Is America Still the Leader of the Free World?

The answer depends on how the term is defined.

Geopolitically, the United States remains one of the most powerful democracies in the world. Its military strength, economic significance, and role in international alliances continue to secure it an exceptional position.

As a democratic model, however, the question has become more complex.

Those who understand freedom primarily as the protection of individual rights and the limitation of power will continue to find a unique model in the American Constitution, unless they are Muslim or Jewish.

Those who associate freedom more strongly with political participation, direct democracy, and broad party pluralism are more likely to look toward Switzerland. From this perspective, the United States appears to be slipping toward an intermediate stage between democracy and dictatorship: one party less, and one would indeed be facing an American dictatorship.

Okay Altinisik | 19-7-2026, 1:09:24