Challenge: describe "your" country

[Redalgo]

The country in question would be a place of stark political and economic juxtapositions.

It is a federation of constitutional republics and representative, liberal democracy yet socialist symbolism is ubiquitous. A “me-oriented” culture, well-established class system, deeply-embedded love of individualism, and robust market competition contrast with a guaranteed minimum income, compensation controls, decentralized management of the economy via worker cooperatives, social programs promising the most fundamental material necessities of life to all, and the third rail of the country’s politics: workplace democracy. The value of egalitarianism is stressed as an ideal but in practice ones lot in life is largely at the mercy of market forces. Ones fortunes are liable to swing high and low in the wake of co-op successes and failures. Most workers go through bankruptcy at some point in their lives and social mobility unfortunately cuts both ways. High taxes and the need to save up as a hedge against risks incurred through heavy reinvestment of income into ones co-op translates into only modest amounts of disposable income for workers - discouraging them from the sort of consumerism one would observe in, say, the States.

In spite of a fluid labour market and the overall ease of doing business, environmental policies keep energy costs high and contribute to economic expansion occurring at an anemic crawl - growth of GDP prone to slumps in which it fails to surpass the usually low rate of inflation. The nationalized nuclear industry is uncontroversial and provides most of the electricity demanded by the public. Liberals push for deregulation and worry the current environmental agenda is hindering national development with mountains of red tape whereas greens are determined to fully shift to renewable sources of energy. More eccentrically, many animal species have been extended so many rights that ranching has become dominated by vast co-ops which shoulder most family farms out of the market. Many folk in the mining and timber industries are frustrated by how much of the land is designated as wilderness fully off-limits to development and exploitation.

Elections and campaigns are internationally deemed to be free and fair but are also tightly regulated and attract domestic criticism. All factions benefit from proportional allotment of seats in congress, a small handful of public media outlets provide viewers with quality coverage of party platforms, candidates, the issues, and emerging political events but many claim the state controls much of the media and the most influential of political institutions in academia behind the scenes while infringing on the constitutionally-promised freedom of expression. Term limits prevent voters from getting to know their representatives well, so they are more inclined to vote for or against entire parties - parties that frustrate them with their internal bickering, power struggles, embarrassing scandals, and doctrinal splits. Socialist, green, liberal, and conservative parties are often gridlocked in congress and - in spite of having sharply reduced income inequality since the country’s founding - efforts to promote equality of opportunity both within government and outside of it in society as a whole have yielded only mixed results. Partisanship reaches a feverishly high pitch once every ten years when a constitutional convention is automatically convened to update the terms of the social contract.

The government is irreligious and tends to incessantly nag its citizens with public service announcements - delegating most regulatory responsibilities to the many provinces. Strict constitutional limits on the government’s power combine with a comprehensive list of social rights for it to enforce yielded a multicultural society, legal recreational drug use, legal prostitution, a sexually liberated population, a noticeable absence of censorship in the media (including for obscenities), shift toward rehabilitating rather than imprisoning most convicts, state acknowledgement of civil partnership pacts betwixt any combination of consenting adults, and so forth. Leaders are preachier with than tough on diplomatic matters - fussing about humanitarian crises abroad while maintaining only minimalist armed forces. The state cannot increase the funding without diving into deficit spending yet manages to make a difference in many places through generous contributions of aid. Military interventions are only practical courses of action when allies are willing to help.

Edit: I’d be willing to elaborate on anything if asked, and would gladly discuss any matters I forgot to cover in this initial response. I'm rubbish with pulling statistics out of thin air so I've abstained from including any.