![]() |
|
| The Debate Forums | Blogs | | | Donate | Register (it's free) | Chatroom | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||||
|
| | Thread Tools |
| | #1 (permalink) (top) |
| Hot Lava Posts: 925 | I keep hearing the US referred to as a Democracy. While it may ( unfortunately ) be such a beast now, that was not the original intent. The Constitution speaks of the "republican form of Government," the we pledge allegiance "to the Republic..." and Benjamin Franklin answered "A Republic, if you can keep it." I think it important to understand the difference between the two. In a Democracy, the will of the majority is paramount: always, in all ways, in every situation. In a Democracy, a suitably large majority can ( and usually does ) order the extermination, expulsion, taxation, disenfranchisement, and oppression of a suitably small minority. The minority, in other words, have no rights except those which the majority choose to bestow. In a Republic, on the other hand, the actions of the State are severely restrained. The State is forbidden from acting in an oppressive manner. Moreover, the legal restraints which bind the Government are extremely difficult to change; this in the hope that such a change could not possibly take place without overwhelming support, from a vast majority of the populace. In other words, the rights of everyone not just the majority, are sacrosanct. A second important feature of a Republic is a Limited Franchise. Not in the sense that only certain people can vote, but that only certain votes can determine certain issues. For instance, would it be right for non-landowners to determine how the taxes on land are spent? They are unaffected by whatever action is taken, since they own no land; therefore why should they decide such matters? On the other hand, since electing the Sherriff affects everyone in a given County, everyone of voting age should have a vote in this case. It all comes down to a question of relevance. Allowing someone who has no personal stake in something to vote on that thing is not only silly, it is dangerous. A person with no land is not likely to care much that the property-tax increase they just passed may bankrupt the landowners who pay it in the first place. I think it's important to discuss this issue, so that everyone can come to a better understand of, if nothing else, the other side's arguements. |
| | |
| | #2 (permalink) (top) |
| Molten Ash Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 105 | The United States is a Democratic Republic. So to answer your question we're both. Websters Dictionary: Democracy: 1. Government exercised either directly by the people or through elected representatives 2. Rule by the majority. Republic: 1. A political order whose head of state is not a monarch but usu. a president 2. A political order in which the power is held by elected representatives of it's citizens. |
| | |
| | #3 (permalink) (top) |
| Skeptical Patriot Posts: 7,746 | AKA a representative democracy. Probably a few other names these days not polite to repeat. I think most people who use the word "democracy" don't really know the origin of the term and think it applies to the US. It doesn't even apply to Greece anymore, which was where it started. Not a day goes by that I don't see something that reinforces my belief that people are idiots. |
| | |