and here: http://www.webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?threadID=900052&page-thread=8#904492

No shit.

Hear, hear. It is sad to see that the distinction has been lost. Democracy is merely mob rule. Republicanism is the way to go.

it's a democratic republic

*Constitutional republic with democratically elected representatives, to be specific.

Lots of things are mob rule. Democracy, Anachrocapitolism, Republicanism; a single person can be forced into actions by a group of others larger than themselves in all of these. In fact, the only things that aren't mob rule are forms such as monarchy or theocracy. I'm so confused when people get uppity at the idea of mob rule.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/46/46e5b5919bf4609e77d001dca2f58079fcea0c868b923558ccf8f31cc097a0e7.jpg

Elections are not democratic. They establish a hierarchy which are inherently undemocratic because the government officials are the ones capable of making the decisions of government actions. A democracy would give citizens a much more full and equal reign over such a decision. And that sounds like an awfully dreadful idea to me.

The terms aren't mutually exclusive. A "republic" can simple just mean a state without a monarch. A constitution, in and of itself, is just a document or set of traditions which command how a state's government operates. It's perfectly correct to therefore say that China is a "constitutional republic" or that Angola is.

As for democracy, that just describes a form of government where eligible citizens participate in deciding how a state functions, often by choosing representatives. Not at all inconsistent with a republic.


I really just don't understand why people think they're making some profound distinction by saying we're a republic not a democracy. It's like pointing a bagel and saying it's bread. You're right, but you're not saying anything interesting.

It's neither, it's an oligarchy.

Elections are a pretense if the elected officials do whatever they want and are not accountable to the people. I'm done voting until something changes, because I won't tacitly give mandates to officials who are not my legitimate governors.

"It's neither, it's an oligarchy." Constitutionally doesn't mean in practice necessarily ;). I agree with your point, but it's not officially true.

"I'm done voting until something changes"

Well this is a load off, I must say.

If voting made a difference, it would be illegal.

Sophomores.

TrPrado, i guess you're getting hung up on the distinction between de jure and de facto.

A de jure democracy is one which is by the book, a democracy; while being a de facto oligarchy, means it is in reality, or in practice it is an oligarchy. I suspect that inprinciple we're not talking about theory here not reality - because reality is much harder to discuss.

@Tolstoy: of course it makes a difference, the voters feel empowered by the process - otherwise, why would they government bother holding elections at all?

Wikipedia: Democracy is a form of government in which eligible citizens may participate equally – either directly by voting for the passing/ rejecting of laws or running for office themselves, or indirectly through elected representatives.

dictionary.reference.com:
1. 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.

2. a state having such a form of government

--

By what definition is the US not a democracy, at least under the wording of the constitution?

Under what usage is democracy 'merely mob rule'?

Also: EVERYTHING INVICTUS SAID!

Hint hint, the president is not directly chosen by the people. He's chosen by the electoral colleges, whose members can be chosen in any way the state legislatures want. They don't have to let us vote for president.

Does the constitution say the government derives it's power from the people or from god?

Guys, in the pledge of allegiance it says "and to the republic for which it stands." There, end discsdion

orathaic: Neither. It derives its power from the constitution.

Yeah, completely ignore that "We the People..." at the beginning.

Yeah, in the part with no legal standing.

Personally, I like to emphasize the word "republic" to highlight the fact that the United States are really 50 semi-sovereign states, not 50 archaic and meaningless political boundaries.

That's just national organization. That's more federation. The states themselves are also republics.

Statistically it is possible for 78.16% of the population to vote for one president but due to the electoral college another president still win. We need a system purely based off popular vote or a system where swing states can split there votes

I like the electoral college. Swing states matter more with it, though I don't envy how they get bombed with adverts each cycle.

I hate the electoral college. Swing states matter more with it, though I don't envy how they get bombed with adverts each cycle.

democracy = demos+kratia (greek) = people+rule = the rule of the people
republic = res+publica (latin) = thing+people = the thing of the people
I fail to see the big distinction

I like the electoral college. It makes rural voters relevant, and it's reliable enough. It has only failed to match the popular vote winner on a handful of occasions.