Sunday, August 23, 2009

IS THE UNITED STATES A DEMOCRACY OR A REPUBLIC?

I frequently hear the claim, often by modern day politicians from both parties, that our nation is a democracy.
The word "democracy" doesn't appear in either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, the two most basic of our founding documents. However, Article IV, Section 4, guarantees "to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government." It's also noteworthy that our pledge of allegiance doesn't say, "the democracy for which it stands," but rather says, "the republic for which it stands". Nor do we sing "The Battle Hymn of the Democracy," but rather, "The Battle Hymn of the Republic".
The founding fathers, in their wisdom, knew that a democracy would ultimately lead to the same kind of tyranny that the colonies suffered under King George III. John Adams said, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." James Madison said that in a pure democracy, "there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual."
Please do yourself a favor and watch: "A Republic, if you can keep it"
What is the difference between democratic and republican forms of government?
In a democracy, the majority has unchecked power, either directly or through popularly elected officials. The law is whatever the government determines it to be and any restraint is upon the individual instead of the government. Rights are viewed as privileges and are granted by the government. Therefore, they can be terminated by the government.
John Adams perhaps best communicated the difference between the two when he said, "You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe." Nowhere in our founding documents does it suggest that our rights come from the government. Rather, they are given to us by God and therefore, man cannot take (or vote) them away. This is a crucial difference.
In a republican form of government, all citizens and government officials are subject to the same laws. Government power is limited through a series of checks and balances. Government is not the giver of rights, but is the protector of rights, protecting it's citizens against fraud and force, but not intervening in peaceable, voluntary exchange.
Chief Justice John Marshall noted, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."
Do Americans still hold the republican principles intended by our nation's founders? Do most Americans know or care about the difference between a democracy and a republic? Or, do we now prefer the type of tyranny that our framer's warned against, the type of tyranny where Congress can do anything that they desire, as long as they can drum up a majority vote?

8 Comments:

  1. Do you believe the Constitution is the rule of law? Do you believe in the original intent of our founding fathers? Do you want to reform Congress? If your answer is yes, we have to work together to make this happen.

    http://animal-farm.us/change/constitution-project-575
    ReplyDelete
  2. If we don't fight for our Freedom or the Republic, We will be slaves to Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank The Banking Queen, And All the other Liberals out their, They can take our jobs, But they can never take Our Freedom, You Here me, FREEDOM!
    ReplyDelete
  3. Barry CalliganDec 11, 2009 01:52 PM
    We should Fight this Fight against The Left-Wing Liberals to save This Country From Tyranny, So Read Mark Levin's Liberty and Tyranny, And You will learn about what We are fighting against, We should Fight for Our Freedom.
    ReplyDelete
  4. "What is the difference between democratic and republican forms of government?"

    We are a democratic republic. We are not a democracy. We are not a republic. We are a democratic republic. Anyone who tries to push us towards an absolute democracy is a communist; anyone who tries to push us towards a strict republic is a fascist.
    ReplyDelete
  5. "In a democracy, the majority has unchecked power, either directly or through popularly elected officials. The law is whatever the government determines it to be and any restraint is upon the individual instead of the government. Rights are viewed as privileges and are granted by the government. Therefore, they can be terminated by the government."

    Don’t tell people what to think. Let them think on their own: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy

    Definition of DEMOCRACY:
    A: government by the people; especially: rule of the majority
    B: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.
    ReplyDelete
  6. "John Adams perhaps best communicated the difference between the two when he said, "You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe." Nowhere in our founding documents does it suggest that our rights come from the government. Rather, they are given to us by God and therefore, man cannot take (or vote) them away. This is a crucial difference."

    Be careful if you start pulling quotes from our brilliant forefathers. I study literature, and as a libertarian I am very passionate about American Literature. I am aware that there are contradictions written by our forefathers. But as a true American, I do not waste my time on arguing about the existence of these discrepancies. Instead I focus on revealing the overall ideas embedded in freedom that these men were trying to express. For example in one of John Adams letters to Abigail Adams he wrote: “When Congress first met, Mr. Cushing made a Motion, that it should be opened with Prayer. It was opposed by Mr. Jay of N. York and Mr. Rutledge, of South Carolina, because we were so divided in religious Sentiments . . . so that we could not join in the same Act of Worship” (The Norton Anthology: American Literature; Seventh edition; Volume A; page 618). I am no trying to be a dick. I just get aggravated when people inconsiderately quote my forefathers to prove a political point. Because of the way language was written and spoken back then, it is way too easy to use quotes out of context. My quote is a perfect example. It may seem like I am trying to prove that these men didn't agree about using religion as a blueprint for culture. But if you were to read the full letter that I pulled my quote from, you would see that the different sects ended up coming together for prayer under an Episcopalian minister (Samuel Cooper).
    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.
    ReplyDelete
  8. "In a republican form of government, all citizens and government officials are subject to the same laws. Government power is limited through a series of checks and balances. Government is not the giver of rights, but is the protector of rights, protecting it's citizens against fraud and force, but not intervening in peaceable, voluntary exchange."

    If you really believe that this dribble is true then you are re as dumb as the progressive socialists in this country.

    Chief Justice John Marshall noted, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

    He noted this in what? What is the context? Is a balanced republic the same thing as a republic? On paper communism looks great… So that means “balanced communism” would work. BUT NO FORM OF GOVERNMENT WILL EVER BE BALANCED! I am not promoting anarchy. I think some form of government is necessary (in my opinion smaller is better). Also, I think we are better off emulating some forms of government rather than others (I’ll take a capitalist democratic republic over communism any day); but again, enough with the meaningless quotes. Add some real meat to your opinion.

    "Do Americans still hold the republican principles intended by our nation's founders? Do most Americans know or care about the difference between a democracy and a republic? Or, do we now prefer the type of tyranny that our framer's warned against, the type of tyranny where Congress can do anything that they desire, as long as they can drum up a majority vote?"

    I’m not even going to bother with this section. This type of shit is why I am usually alone when defending my views against a myriad of liberals in my college classrooms. I feel like I have very little intellectual support from the conservative and right wing community. Rhetoric is great when you are on a pulpit, preaching to the choir. But in the real world, we need conservatives who can make intellectual arguments. My generation is hooked on pseudo-intellectual progressive ideology. But they cannot be weaned off by pseudo-intellectual conservative ideology.

    The answer is not “socialism is BAD!” The answer is that if you try to create a socialist society, human nature will inevitably cause it to become much more corrupt than a capitalist democratic republic. Instead of telling someone they are “a socialist” or “an idiot” for voting for Obama, tell them that people make mistakes, that’s why pencils have erases; and, that they can fix their mistakes in the upcoming election. If nothing else gets absorbed from my rant, please absorb this one thing: As a group, my liberal friends get the upper hand against me by reverting to the same exact dogma that I see conservatives using. But as individuals, NONE of my peers can stand up to me in an honest open minded debate that is absent of rhetoric.
    ReplyDelete

Thank you for your comments. I appreciate your input!