Zone1 America is not a democracy its a republic ?

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Jan 20, 2016
46,255
19,896
2,300
Y Cae Ras
I see this repeated a lot on this forum. Ive never really understood this point of view and what those stating it are getting at.

It usually gets stated when some undemocratic action needs to be justified. Americans vote on everything. And they value their vote. People who vote are the democratic process.

And that might be the key word. Republic might be the title but democracy is the process. You cant have one without the other. It is nonsense to suggest otherwise.

America is a ollection of quasi independent states. But they arent really. The civil war squashed that notion. ALabama eont unilaterally invade Canada.

People who deny democracy never have a better alternative. Nor can they point to a successful society that has rejected democracy.

The process is the thing not the title.

So where in this republic is democracy not the key ingredient ?
 
People confuse ''democracy'' with ''a Democracy'' all of the tiime.

They're completely antithetical terms.

"A Democracy'' is a specific form of government which is antithetical to ''democracy'' itself since the chief characteristic of ''a Democracy'' is rule by omnipotent Majority.

This is also what makes ''a Democracy'' antithetical to ''a Republic'' because ''democracy'' itself is a feature of "a Republic.''

I rarely, if ever, see this topic discussed/debated correctly.
 
Last edited:
I see this repeated a lot on this forum. Ive never really understood this point of view and what those stating it are getting at.

It usually gets stated when some undemocratic action needs to be justified. Americans vote on everything. And they value their vote. People who vote are the democratic process.

And that might be the key word. Republic might be the title but democracy is the process. You cant have one without the other. It is nonsense to suggest otherwise.

America is a ollection of quasi independent states. But they arent really. The civil war squashed that notion. ALabama eont unilaterally invade Canada.

People who deny democracy never have a better alternative. Nor can they point to a successful society that has rejected democracy.

The process is the thing not the title.

So where in this republic is democracy not the key ingredient ?
The point is, the Founding Fathers were horrified of a pure democracy.

Conversely, the Left makes every attempt to convert government into a pure democracy, that is, a democracy that benefits them.

That is why Progressives at the turn of the 20th century changed the Constitution to allow Senators to be directly elected by the people instead of states deciding. This is also why the Left seeks to get rid of the Electoral college.

If the Left had their way, the heavily populated states of New York and California would decide every Presidential election.

The Left are experts with propaganda, as the vast majority of media and academia are Left wing. And they are experts at creating violent mobs, which is the whole goal, mob rule.
 
They always put the letter ''a'' in front of the word democracy.

That's where they screw up the whole context of discussion/debate and at that point it becomes useless to even pursue any meaningful dialogue when everybody starts doing it.

Once you insert that ''a'' in front of democracy, you're not even talking about democracy any more.

Again...

"A Democracy'' is antithetical to ''democracy.''

And this is the case whether you're talking about ''a Direct Democracy'' or ''a Representative Democracy.''

Both are antithetical to ''a Republic'' and therefore antithetical to ''democracy'' itself.

There are very strict fundamentals involved here and understanding the difference is essential to comprehension of those strict, specific fundamentals which are involved. Gawdammit...
 
Last edited:
The point is, the Founding Fathers were horrified of a pure democracy.

Conversely, the Left makes every attempt to convert government into a pure democracy, that is, a democracy that benefits them.

That is why Progressives at the turn of the 20th century changed the Constitution to allow Senators to be directly elected by the people instead of states deciding. This is also why the Left seeks to get rid of the Electoral college.

If the Left had their way, the heavily populated states of New York and California would decide every Presidential election.

The Left are experts with propaganda, as the vast majority of media and academia are Left wing. And they are experts at creating violent mobs, which is the whole goal, mob rule.
People should decide that election not geography. A system that people cannot influence is doomed.
A voter in New York should have the same standing as a voter in a swing state.
 
People confuse ''democracy'' with ''a Democracy'' all of the tiime.

They're completely antithetical terms.

"A Democracy'' is a specific form of government which is antithetical to ''democracy'' itself since the chief characteristic of ''a Democracy'' is rule by omnipotent Majority.

This is also what makes ''a Democracy'' antithetical to ''a Republic'' because ''democracy'' itself is a feature of "a Republic.''

I rarely, if ever, see this topic discussed/debated correctly.
But you vote on everything.
We have a democracy in the UK. Its different to the US but its still a democracy.
 
They always put the letter ''a'' in front of the word democracy.

That's where they screw up the whole context of discussion/debate and at that point it becomes useless to even peursue dialogue.

Once you insert that ''a'' in front of democracy, you're not even talking about democracy any more.

Again...

"A Democracy'' is antithetical to ''democracy.''

And this is the case whether you're talking about ''a Direct Democracy'' or ''a Representative Democracy.''

Both are antithetical to ''a Republic'' and therefore antithetical to ''democracy'' itself.

There are fundamentals involved here and understanding the difference is essential to comprehension of the fundamentals involved. Gawdammit...
confused-msnbc-reporter-facial-expression-during-his-interview-with-president-donald-trump.jpg
 
In the US we democratically elect people to represent the interests of multinational corporations and globalist think tanks. This is a great system because people think that our elected tyrants are working for the best interests of the people so we don't use our 2nd Amendment rights to do 2nd Amendment things. And if you don't like your tyrant you can vote for a tyrant with a different letter after his name. What's not to love about it?
 
In the US we democratically elect people to represent the interests of multinational corporations and globalist think tanks. This is a great system because people think that our elected tyrants are working for the best interests of the people so we don't use our 2nd Amendment rights to do 2nd Amendment things. And if you don't like your tyrant you can vote for a tyrant with a different letter after his name. What's not to love about it?
Its a different issue.
 
But you vote on everything.
We have a democracy in the UK. Its different to the US but its still a democracy.
The only thing I'm allowed to vote on is what crazy candidate the duopoly puts before us, which amounts to voting for either freezing rain or sleet.

Then we have the ability to vote down taxes for our schools, so that children have less support.

That is about it.

Yay.
 
People should decide that election not geography. A system that people cannot influence is doomed.
A voter in New York should have the same standing as a voter in a swing state.
No one should be marginalized and ignored simply on the fact that they are the minority.

You would agree with me if the minority agreed with you, otherwise, they must be pulverized into powder and blown away.

That is why if the roles were reversed, if California and New York were conservative, your position would be the opposit.
 
No one should be marginalized and ignored simply on the fact that they are the minority.

You would agree with me if the minority agreed with you, otherwise, they must be pulverized into powder and blown away.

That is why if the roles were reversed, if California and New York were conservative, your position would be the opposit.
Such a drama queen....

f46b4ae81381ef8c30125456b5251598ff2424ca.gifv
 
In some contexts ... "Republic" means "of the people" ... whereas "Monarchy" means "of the King" ... under a monarchy, 90% of the population have no say in government, the commoners are to be seen and not heard ... under a Republic government, commoners do have a say ... maybe not much of a say, but they don't get their tongues cut out for trying ...

The United States is a Representative Democracy with an independent judiciary ... we divide ourselves into 435 equal parts and select someone from within to go to a central meeting place and vote on our behalf ... and this forms our lower legislative house ... Canada uses the English Parliamentary System with an independent judiciary ... the difference being the Chief Executive is chosen from among the MPs, instead of as a separate elective office ... both are "of the people" and so can be properly called republics ...

The English judiciary is the extension of the King ... and Judges there are answerable to the King himself de jure ... and that's both secular and ecclesiastic courts ... as King Charles III is Head-of-State and Head-of-Church in all the English speaking lands ... by order of GOD, so no messing around here okay ... republicanism is of Satan formed in the pits of Hell (aka France) ...

Jesus is the King of kings ... and we don't vote for king ... now do we? ...
 
Time for some basic education again.
Invest ten and a half minutes to watch this video on government types and how the USA fits in the spectrum.

The American Form of Government​

 
Last edited:
People should decide that election not geography. A system that people cannot influence is doomed.
A voter in New York should have the same standing as a voter in a swing state.

They have that level in their own States, and in whatever home rule provisions are allowed for their localities in said States.

They also have that vote via the House of Representatives at the Federal level.
 
I see this repeated a lot on this forum. Ive never really understood this point of view and what those stating it are getting at.

It usually gets stated when some undemocratic action needs to be justified. Americans vote on everything. And they value their vote. People who vote are the democratic process.

And that might be the key word. Republic might be the title but democracy is the process. You cant have one without the other. It is nonsense to suggest otherwise.

America is a ollection of quasi independent states. But they arent really. The civil war squashed that notion. ALabama eont unilaterally invade Canada.

People who deny democracy never have a better alternative. Nor can they point to a successful society that has rejected democracy.

The process is the thing not the title.

So where in this republic is democracy not the key ingredient ?
So, you have various bodies of government in the U.S., some state, some local, some federal. When we talk about a republic, we are talking at the federal level, but really, even state governments are republics because, while we vote for our representation, that’s where it ends for us. THEY are the ones who basically do what we ask them to, supposedly. Out leaders rule according to the cotus, that’s essentially a republic. A democracy leans more toward the people rule by majority.
 

Forum List

Back
Top