The “Democracy Experts” Who Cannot Say That the USA Is Not a Democracy

When you read the Journal of Democracy, Freedom House, the V-Dem reports, or the papers by Larry Diamond, you always hear the same tune: “There is a global democratic decline… but the United States remains a beacon, even if somewhat dimmed.”

Never, not once in 40 years, will you find a headline like: “The United States Is No Longer a Democracy.” Not even after Citizens United, not even after January 6, 2021, not even with 90% of American laws written by lobbyists (Gilens-Page study 2014).

Why?

Because they are paid not to say it.

This article expands on the key players in the "democracy promotion" ecosystem, highlighting how US funding ties prevent them from critically examining whether the American model itself qualifies as true democracy. Beyond the initial examples, there are many more institutions that perpetuate this selective blindness, often with direct or indirect US government support.

1. The Journal of Democracy

Published by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Funding FY2025: Despite an initial block by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in January 2025, NED regained access to congressionally appropriated funds in March 2025. Allocated approximately $25 million based on first-quarter figures of $6.3 million (97% from the US Congress).

The NED was created in 1983 by Congress to do in “private” version what the CIA did in secret version: destabilize non-aligned governments and sell the “American model” as the only possible one. The Journal is its academic house organ. It will criticize Trump, it will criticize gerrymandering, it will criticize polarization. But it will never say the naked truth: the USA is a plutocratic oligarchy with elections. Because if it did, Congress would cut its funding tomorrow.

2. Freedom House

Funding 2025: Prior to the US foreign aid freeze on January 20, 2025, 92% from the US government (State Department + USAID). Obligated amount around $10.5 million, with $6.6 million outlayed before constraints. The rest from “liberal” foundations (Ford, MacArthur) that never bite the hand that feeds them.

It classifies Hungary as “partly free” and China as “not free.” The USA? Always “free,” even with the highest mass incarceration on the planet and private campaign financing that turns voting into an auction. Budget constraints in 2025 led to modified report processes due to the aid freeze.

3. V-Dem Institute (Varieties of Democracy)

University of Gothenburg, but funded primarily by Swedish and EU grants (e.g., Swedish Research Council, Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, European Research Council—with some historical US ties via USAID, State Department, NED).

It produces beautiful indices. US “Liberal Democracy” Index 2024 (from 2025 report): 0.75 (declining but ranked 24th out of 179). “Electoral Democracy” Index USA: 0.84 (ranked 19th).

It never reaches the point of saying “it is not democracy.” Because if it did, the grants would disappear.

4. USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development)

As one of the primary US government arms for democracy promotion, USAID allocates billions in funding for "democratic governance" programs worldwide. In FY2024, it provided over $2.8 billion for democracy, human rights, and governance initiatives, often channeling funds through NGOs and think tanks.

USAID partners closely with organizations like NED and Freedom House, promoting electoral systems and civil society development abroad. Yet, it never applies the same scrutiny to the US, where private money dominates elections and voter suppression persists. Criticizing the American system would undermine its mission to export "US-style democracy." USAID's reports praise US institutions as models, ignoring oligarchic elements, because its existence depends on Congressional funding tied to promoting American interests.

5. International Republican Institute (IRI) and National Democratic Institute (NDI)

These two organizations, both core grantees of NED, receive tens of millions annually from US government sources (e.g., $80 million combined in FY2024). IRI and NDI focus on party-building, election monitoring, and governance training globally, often in partnership with USAID.

They critique "democratic backsliding" in countries like Hungary or Poland but maintain silence on US issues like gerrymandering, dark money in campaigns, or the Electoral College's anti-majoritarian effects. As bipartisan arms of US foreign policy, they promote a sanitized version of American democracy abroad. Admitting the US is an oligarchy would jeopardize their funding and access to State Department contracts.

6. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Funded by grants from the US government, foundations like the Open Society Foundations, and corporate donors, Carnegie spent over $30 million on democracy and rule-of-law programs in 2024. Its Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program produces reports on global democratic trends.

While critiquing authoritarianism in Russia or China, Carnegie's analyses of the US focus on "challenges" like polarization, never labeling it as non-democratic. With deep ties to US policymakers (many fellows are former officials), it avoids biting the hand that funds it. Questioning US democracy would alienate donors and reduce its influence in Washington circles.

7. The Star Professors

Larry Diamond (Stanford, former NED consultant), Francis Fukuyama (Stanford), Yascha Mounk (Johns Hopkins), Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt (Harvard). All funded, directly or indirectly, by foundations and think tanks that live on public or semi-public American money.

They write beautiful books on “the decline of democracy.” But the chapter titled “The United States Is Not a Democracy” they will never write. Because their careers, their grants, their chairs depend on not writing it.

The Acid Test (2021-2025)

After the Capitol assault, after the Supreme Court ruling that abolished the federal right to abortion, after 75% of Americans say that “the country is on the wrong track” (AP-NORC 2025), none of these entities has changed the US classification from “democracy” to “hybrid regime” or “electoral oligarchy.”

Why?

Because their job is not to study democracy. It is to sell it in export version.

It is the same logic as Coca-Cola funding studies on sugar: the results are predictable before they even start.

What They Do Instead

• They classify Putin’s Russia as “authoritarian” (true).
• They classify Orbán’s Hungary as “in decline” (true).
• They classify Venezuela as “not free” (true).

And then they use these cases to say: “See? The American model, despite its flaws, is always the best.”

It is marketing, not science.

What You Will Never Find in These Journals or Reports

• An article titled “The United States Is an Oligarchy with Elections.”
• A report that places the USA and Saudi Arabia in the same category “hybrid regimes.”
• A paper that cites Gilens-Page 2014 as definitive proof that the average American citizen has zero statistical influence on public policies.

Because if they did, the US Congress would cut the funding the next day.

Conclusion

The Journal of Democracy, Freedom House, V-Dem, USAID, IRI, NDI, Carnegie, and the entire academic-financial circus of “democracy promotion” are not there to understand how democracy really works. They are there to sell the rigged version made in USA.

We are not paid by anyone. That is why we can say it clearly:

The United States is not a democracy. It is the most powerful and best-masked oligarchy in history.

And all the “experts” who live on American money will never tell you.

We will.