Do OWSers understand what they are calling for is tyranny?

Thank you, Truthmatters! I read that years ago and had lost the link. An excellent rebuttal.

America: Republic or Democracy?

It isn't true! That's what the problem is, it isn't true.

A republic is government based on a charter, a written document. It has NOTHING to do with an elected government. The charter for the US is the Comstitution. This means that the written document cannot be voided by democracy or a democratic vote.

It is this kind of ignorance that means the end of the republic. It's not only that liberals are uneducated, they cannot be educated.
 
Thank you, Truthmatters! I read that years ago and had lost the link. An excellent rebuttal.

America: Republic or Democracy?

It isn't true! That's what the problem is, it isn't true.

A republic is government based on a charter, a written document. It has NOTHING to do with an elected government. The charter for the US is the Comstitution. This means that the written document cannot be voided by democracy or a democratic vote.

It is this kind of ignorance that means the end of the republic. It's not only that liberals are uneducated, they cannot be educated.

Except it is true. :eusa_angel:
 
I know that. It is the morons like TruthMocker who don't get it. Having said that, we are a Republic. A true democracy is majority (or mob) rule. We do not have that, we have a Constitutional Republic - protecting minorities from mob rule.
Yep. And why there is such a process as the Electoral College that so many on the left want to see go away...:eusa_whistle:

I know you've been asleep for about 200 years so let me fill you in: the Electoral College doesn't work anything like it was originally intended to or the way it originally operated. The votes of electors are determined by majority rule--state-by-state majority rule (and, in two states, with a dash of Congressional district-by-district majority rule thrown in).

The debate today isn't about whether majority rule should be the deciding principal guiding the functioning of the Electoral College (that one has been settled), it's whether it should be state-by-state majorities or the overall national majority.
 
It isn't true! That's what the problem is, it isn't true.

A republic is government based on a charter, a written document. It has NOTHING to do with an elected government.

Incorrect on both counts. Governments that are not republics can also be based on a charter or written document. The best and most common example of a constitutional non-republic is a constitutional monarchy. And all republics do have elected governments, although some have restricted the constituency allowed an effective vote. A republic contrasts with a monarchy, dictatorship, or junta. A constitutional base is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for a government to be called a republic.

Republics with a broad-based constituency, especially universal suffrage, may be considered democratic republics. Republics with limited constituencies, such as the Roman Republic or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, should be called aristocratic republics.

The charter for the US is the Comstitution. This means that the written document cannot be voided by democracy or a democratic vote.

Also incorrect. There are two ways that the Constitution could be legally voided by democratic processes. First, the democratically-elected representatives in Congress could vote in a two-thirds majority to do so by Constitutional amendment. Second, the democratically-elected state legislatures could vote to create a new Constitutional convention which could do so. Upon that amendment abolishing the Constitution (and, one imagines, putting forth a replacement) being ratified by three-fourths of the democratically-elected state legislatures, it would take effect.

Again: the dichotomy advanced between republic and democracy is a false one. A republic that is not democratic is an aristocratic republic. Those who insist on saying "we have a republic, not a democracy" are affirming their support for aristocracy.
 
Thank you, Truthmatters! I read that years ago and had lost the link. An excellent rebuttal.

America: Republic or Democracy?

It isn't true! That's what the problem is, it isn't true.

A republic is government based on a charter, a written document. It has NOTHING to do with an elected government. The charter for the US is the Comstitution. This means that the written document cannot be voided by democracy or a democratic vote.

It is this kind of ignorance that means the end of the republic. It's not only that liberals are uneducated, they cannot be educated.

We are a democracy. A majority decided that we would have a Constitution. The minority is subject to the Constitution whether they voted for it or not.
 
OWS protesters get pepper sprayed for breaking the law and are hailed as heroes. In syria, protesters call for revolution to overthrow a government that is the kind OWS is calling for, many get shot and killed by the government, and die anonymously. You people have no idea the type of horrific tyrannical government that your "revolution" will bring us. What gives YOU the right to choose how others live? Please disband and consider legal means of change, and while you are at it educate yourselves on what liberty really is...it is a government that secures liberty not a government that provides everything to a society of lazy degenerates. These OWSers, like the successful statist uprisings across the world have managed to do nothing to secure liberty, yet have secured tyranny in every country where the people demand free stuff.


A Global Revolution to Overthrow Statism - YouTube[/url


I guess lucky for Nathan Hale he got his hero status before you people started rewriting the rules.
 
No wonder we're in the abysmal straits we're in.

By definition, a republic is a political unit governed by a charter, while a democracy is a government whose prevailing force is always that of the majority. Perhaps one of the difficulties in defining these two words — democracy and republic — stems from the fact that many people consider them to be synonyms, which they aren’t. They are no more alike than an apple and a banana, and yet they are often used interchangeably.

What Is the Difference Between a Republic and a Democracy?
 
By definition, a republic is a political unit governed by a charter

No. That is simply wrong, and it is not going to cease being wrong if you just keep repeating it. Here: Republic | Define Republic at Dictionary.com

"A state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them."

This exactly fits the definition I presented before. It has nothing to do with being governed by a charter.

while a democracy is a government whose prevailing force is always that of the majority.

Again, NO. While democracy is usually a matter of majority rule, it's more than that. A non-democratic or aristocratic republic is also a government in which the prevailing force is that of the majority, but those entitled to vote is restricted. Here: Democracy | Define Democracy at Dictionary.com

"Government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system."

The second form of democracy mentioned here describes representative democracy or DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.

Perhaps one of the difficulties in defining these two words — democracy and republic — stems from the fact that many people consider them to be synonyms, which they aren’t. They are no more alike than an apple and a banana, and yet they are often used interchangeably.

We understand the difference. You don't seem to understand that this difference does not amount to an antagonism. A democracy does not have to be a republic, nor does a republic have to be a democracy. But the one CAN be the other, in the form of a representative democracy or DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.

A direct democracy is not a republic, and an aristocratic republic is not a democracy. But a democratic republic is both.
 
Again: the dichotomy advanced between republic and democracy is a false one. A republic that is not democratic is an aristocratic republic. Those who insist on saying "we have a republic, not a democracy" are affirming their support for aristocracy.

That would be it exactly. It's a feature, not a bug.
 
We have protection for minorities in our system.



Your comment is naive. There was little other work, and when they tried to negotiate on their own terms, the Pinkertons were called in.



We're a representative democracy. As individuals have gained more political power, conservatives have protested against and sought to thwart that increase of power.

These people have no clue of their own history. I live near the Coal Regions of Central Pennsylvania... I know about the Pinkertons and the worker's counter... the Molly Maguires.

They were the start of Unions and organized labor.... both sides had their thugs and let me tell you something.... what these spoiled people call thuggery these days is pure diplomacy as compared to what ended the Robber Baron days of America... it was bloody as hell.

But they don't teach that part of History in what the righties call "left wing" education... they get the glossed over rendition that makes people like Carnegie, Rockefeller and JP Morgan look like saints.

That's the problem with the right wing. They are offered a PG rated history, but reality was definitely NC-17.

The In Depth Truth is out there to be found, for those interested, both Right and Left. Now more so than ever before. You are painting False images.

I am painting false images? Ok... So my grandmother, mother and father were lying to me then? Perhaps it's you that doesn't know the In Depth Truth.
 
These people have no clue of their own history. I live near the Coal Regions of Central Pennsylvania... I know about the Pinkertons and the worker's counter... the Molly Maguires.

They were the start of Unions and organized labor.... both sides had their thugs and let me tell you something.... what these spoiled people call thuggery these days is pure diplomacy as compared to what ended the Robber Baron days of America... it was bloody as hell.

But they don't teach that part of History in what the righties call "left wing" education... they get the glossed over rendition that makes people like Carnegie, Rockefeller and JP Morgan look like saints.

That's the problem with the right wing. They are offered a PG rated history, but reality was definitely NC-17.

The In Depth Truth is out there to be found, for those interested, both Right and Left. Now more so than ever before. You are painting False images.

I am painting false images? Ok... So my grandmother, mother and father were lying to me then? Perhaps it's you that doesn't know the In Depth Truth.

Two important points.
1) You are projecting. What, I don't know. There was nothing Personal reflected towards you in my comment. What I was referring to very directly, is the vast amount of Documented information found on line on virtually any topic.

2) It is generally a very bad idea to bring up Family Members in a Thread unless you have a really strong motive to do so. The general Rules that normally protect you from Family attack are pretty much void, when you do that. People can be very creative here in meanness and insult, when you open the door, which you just did. I'm just telling you out of concern, it is best to not bring them up.

Perhaps it's you that doesn't know the In Depth Truth.

You are really on a roll here, do you need me to point out that this is rooted in misconception?

Even though your generalization is false, I did not confront it.

That's the problem with the right wing. They are offered a PG rated history, but reality was definitely

Blind Man shooting at the World?

I wonder how many Government Employees, Representatives, even Judges, are going to be sharing Thanksgiving Tables with leaders of Industry, Bankers, Lobbyists, and Lawyers?
 
its only bannable if the intent was to deceive. Bolding, making bigger, and posting that you changed it is not being deceitful. :) but thanks for attempting the derail. How very liberal of you.
 
Last edited:
its only bannable if the intent was to deceive. Bolding, making bigger, and posting that you changed it is not being deceitful. :) but thanks for attempting the derail. How very liberal of you.

uh... no. i was a mod when the rule was passed. it was to keep people from distorting other people's posts.

now run along and piss off. :thup:
 
its only bannable if the intent was to deceive. Bolding, making bigger, and posting that you changed it is not being deceitful. :) but thanks for attempting the derail. How very liberal of you.

I'm telling you as a Friend. It was an Offense, a Violation of the Rules. You can legitimately shorten a quote to address a part of it. You can't substitute words, change meanings or context in doing that. Your Post was a clear violation. Infractions and Banning are up to the discretion of the Mod.
 
Democracies give no power to minorities. Are some of you really this stupid about basic civics in regard to how we were founded and what the founders intentions were? We're a republic. There is no mob rule in this country. At least not yet.
Remember the old axiom of 'being careful for what you wish for'? OWS crybabies had better let go of thier emotionalism lest they get something they didn't bargain for. A lesson the Germans failed to heed in the 1930's...

What lessons did you learn from Wall Street destroying the American economy with a $516 trillion dollar derivatives Ponzi scheme?

Republicans call that "good capitalism".

In fact, many don't even believe it ever happened, after all, no one broke any laws. They think the left just hates good old "capitalism".

Strange, when I pointed out the connection between "capitalism" and "supply and demand", one poster wrote it was another weird left wing "theory".

The right thinks that corporations "make jobs", kind of like they did in communist Russia with their central planning. They really don't understand "supply and demand". Corporations have been saying "demand is soft and that's why they aren't hiring". Right wingers hear "there is uncertainty". But they always hear only what they want to.


Review: Businesses Say Lack of Demand, Not Regulation, Kills Jobs
 
OWS protesters get pepper sprayed for breaking the law and are hailed as heroes. In syria, protesters call for revolution to overthrow a government that is the kind OWS is calling for, many get shot and killed by the government, and die anonymously.

The OWS isn't calling for the kind of government Syria has. You're either a total liar or a serious moron. I'm betting you really believe what you say and you are just very, very stupid.
 

Forum List

Back
Top