• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Republic vs. Democracy

Rex

Rex

Founder
I'm tired of seeing the word democracy. Let me try and educate.

Just after the completion and signing of the Constitution, in reply to a woman's inquiry as to the type of government the Founders had created, Benjamin Franklin said, "A Republic, if you can keep it."



Not only have we failed to keep it, most don't even know what it is.​







A Republic is representative government ruled by law (the Constitution). A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority (mob rule). A Republic recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals while democracies are only concerned with group wants or needs (the public good). Lawmaking is a slow, deliberate process in our Constitutional Republic requiring approval from the three banches of government, the Supreme Court and individual jurors (jury-nullification). Lawmaking in our unlawful democracy occurs rapidly requiring approval from the whim of the majority as determined by polls and/or voter referendums. A good example of democracy in action is a lynch mob.



Madison warned us of the dangers of democracies with these words,
"Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths...",

"We may define a republic to be ... a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure for a limited period, or during good behavior. It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable title of republic." James Madison, Federalist No. 10, (1787) "A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men." Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862)

​

more
 
skills101

skills101

Vicar of Christ
Agreed... Since when were we a democracy. Even the Romans, who we base our "democracy" on, weren't a complete democracy - the ones who made the decisions were that of high rank and power.
 
Faust

Faust

Active Member
Rex,
I tend to think a little simplistically.
The definition I tend to go with is this,
A republic is a form of gov. where the leaders are elected to do the thinking for the masses.
A democracy is a form of gov. where the leaders are elected to carry out the mandates of the people who elected them.

A democracy takes a lot of work for those who wish to impress their wishes on those who represent them, you have to contact them and make your views heard.
It can be messy, and often seems like mob rule to some but I prefer it to trusting that my representatives will accurately reflect my concerns without my "direct" participatation in the prosses. Yes I'm one of those nuts that contact my representatives through e-mail and in the past snail mail, and you know what? They do respond and in the past have become directly involved with me and my concerns. Thats the kind of attitude that will cause a deep sense of faith in the system and wins my loyalty.
 
Shadow Link

Shadow Link

Active Member
"Republic vs. Democracy"

Looks like, on it's surface, these two terms could be dwindled down to emphasize those that possess and those that are trying to possess. At it's foundation, these two terms have to coordinate to remain a constitutional republic for its very own/possessive existence...


"A Republic, if you can keep it."
 
Duke_Leto

Duke_Leto

Active Member
Christ, the States are a democratic republic. The two terms aren’t mutually exclusive.

How have we “not kept” the republic, anyway? Our government has always been a government for the rich, by the rich. James Madison was a man who owned people. Do you think this may have been a cause for concern about what the majority of people might do to people like him in a direct democracy?

@skills101, what do you mean that we “base our democracy on the Romans?” Every year, our Senators elect two consuls?
 
Last edited:
Shadow Link

Shadow Link

Active Member
It's both. Government power is just being used more cleverly by the wealthy of the world by buying and protecting their puppets through various schemes of Law, launderings, and agenda driven topics creating the types of chaos needed that often goes undetected — eliminating levels and majorities of competition.
 
Jayhawker Soule

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
So we're told that ...
"A good example of democracy in action is s lynch mob."​
and we're suppose to take such sophistry seriously?
 
Augustus

Augustus

…
Duke_Leto said:
Christ, the States are a democratic republic. The two terms aren’t mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

"America isn't a democracy, it's a republic" is one of the stupidest statements in common usage. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in a modern context.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top