Democracy or Republic?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Citizen, Jun 3, 2009.

  1. Citizen

    Citizen Active Member

    May 27, 2009
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    I have seen our form of government constantly refered to as a Democracy, by our politicians and news media, and since I know it is realy a Constitutional Republic, and the word Democracy never appears in either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, I have tried to discover if our politicians were speaking out of ignorance, or if they might have some other reason to propagrate this lie.

    It appears that due to several decades of propaganda the American public has actually bought this lie, believing that a Democracy was what the Founding Fathers intended to establish for our nation. The truth is actually the opposite. The Founding Fathers framed the United States Constitution so as to protect us from democracy.

    Our Republic of the United States of America was founded upon the principles of Liberty and limited government, not upon democracy. In fact, seldom if ever will you find any positive reference to democracy in the founding documents of our nation.

    "Democracy was the right of the people to choose their own tyrants." - James Madison

    Don't you believe if we were supposed to live in a democracy, as our politicians tell us, at least the word democracy would be included in the Constitution?

    We pledge allegiance to the flag, and to the Republic for which it stands, not the democracy for which it stands.
    So since we live in a Republic founded upon the principles of librerty and limited government, maybe the reason our politicians keep trying to convince us that we realy live in a democracy is because they do not like the limits on the powers granted them by our Constitution and want us to believe that majority rule lets them do whatever they want, in our best interests of course.

    The 1928 defination of a democracy, in the US Army Training Manual was: "A government of the masses. Authority - derived through mass meeting of any form of direct experssion. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic - negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, eheather it be based upon deliberation of governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or reguard to consequences. Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, and anarchy."

    By 1952, however, this defination was changed to read: " Besause the United States is a democracy, the majority of the people decide how our government will be organized and run - ant that includes the Army, Navy, and Air Force. The people do this by electing representatives, and these men and women them carry out the wishes of the people."

    Since democracies are where majority rules, is there a form of government that protects both the majority and the minority rights? There is, and it is called a constitutional republic, which may be defined as a society with a form of government based upon the rule of law, in which both the governed and the government are subject to law.

    The form of government our founders established was a republician form of government where the power rests in a written constitution wherein the powers of the government are limited so that the people retain the maximum amount of power themselves.

    Alexander Hamilton was aware of the tendency of a democracy to be torn apart by itself and said, we are now forming a republician form of government. Real liberty is not found in the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments. If we incline too much toward democracy, we shall soon turn into a monarchy, or some other form of dictatorship.

    Alexander Fraser Tyler wrote: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can exist untill the voters discover they can vote themselves largnesse (defined as a liberal gift) out of the public treasury. From that momrnt on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury."

    The above quote, sounds a lot like the things happening today.

    In closing, I would like to say that there are plenty of examples, in the present US legal system, of laws which are repressive, intolerant, unjust, immoral, predatory, just plain rediculous, and demonstrate that the real intent of Congress is not to protect the people's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but to impose upon them an authority which restricts their individual freedoms.

Share This Page