In public discourse, the use of the word "democracy" invokes a majority rules concept, and nothing more. Sure, it is "the people" voting for this or that, but ultimately it is ONLY the majority voting for something that matters.
And that is a dangerous idea.
THAT is why they use that word.
Use of the word "republic" is far more complex, and invokes the idea of checks and balances and limited authority of the government -- at least, as the founders understood it.
Yes, of course, we hear "banana republic" and "third world republic" and "republic of this or that."
WHY would people who want to DECEIVE, for the purpose of CONTROL, champion the use of the word "democracy" while using pejoratives for the word "republic?"
The ONLY reason would be for psychological manipulation to get people to think: democracy, good; republic, bad.
This is the exact opposite of what SHOULD be promoted in public.
That reminds me of how today, in the 21st century, how we can look at history books, which show that Thomas Jefferson's political party ("faction") was Democrat-Republican.
WHY do they say that?
It is a LIE.
Jefferson called himself and his like-minded thinkers: REPUBLICANS.
"Democrat" was a word used for Andrew Jackson and his peeps.
The term "Democrat-Republican" is a made-up term, unknown to Jefferson, and one created for the purpose of deception.
BTW, you still have sidestepped my original point that the Constitution REQUIRES a REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
Why?
"Representative democracy" is not an answer, because it is not a republican form government.
P.S.: Slavery was inherited, not invented by Americans, with a political compromise to preserve it for 21 years after the Constitution (age of majority under the law), and then it would be open to abolishing. It was a compromise, and not a feature, of the new government. So, that is a moot point.
I’m looking forward to a time when people stop being so mentally adolescent such that we can have honest discussions about the mechanical realities of the time period, rather than just “Oh, [keyword]! Therefore [programmed response]!!”
The reasoning was valid but ….
It’s frustrating that we live in a world of adults who have a mindset such that it’s possible to denounce something, yet if you proceed to think critically about how things got to that point, even in the same sentence, you haven’t denounced it enough, and therefore endorse it!!!
It’s a retarded, infantile mindset, that belies the inability of a large group of people to engage in independent thought, and I hate it.
.. so I self censored. Let’s hurry up and win this damn war.
Thanks for your well thought out responses, I enjoyed reading them. You don’t need to win every word exchange and setting down the hatchet can be a good thing after a few exchanges when the other side won’t argue fairly.
In public discourse, the use of the word "democracy" invokes a majority rules concept, and nothing more. Sure, it is "the people" voting for this or that, but ultimately it is ONLY the majority voting for something that matters.
And that is a dangerous idea.
THAT is why they use that word.
Use of the word "republic" is far more complex, and invokes the idea of checks and balances and limited authority of the government -- at least, as the founders understood it.
Yes, of course, we hear "banana republic" and "third world republic" and "republic of this or that."
WHY would people who want to DECEIVE, for the purpose of CONTROL, champion the use of the word "democracy" while using pejoratives for the word "republic?"
The ONLY reason would be for psychological manipulation to get people to think: democracy, good; republic, bad.
This is the exact opposite of what SHOULD be promoted in public.
That reminds me of how today, in the 21st century, how we can look at history books, which show that Thomas Jefferson's political party ("faction") was Democrat-Republican.
WHY do they say that?
It is a LIE.
Jefferson called himself and his like-minded thinkers: REPUBLICANS.
"Democrat" was a word used for Andrew Jackson and his peeps.
The term "Democrat-Republican" is a made-up term, unknown to Jefferson, and one created for the purpose of deception.
BTW, you still have sidestepped my original point that the Constitution REQUIRES a REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
Why?
"Representative democracy" is not an answer, because it is not a republican form government.
P.S.: Slavery was inherited, not invented by Americans, with a political compromise to preserve it for 21 years after the Constitution (age of majority under the law), and then it would be open to abolishing. It was a compromise, and not a feature, of the new government. So, that is a moot point.
I’m looking forward to a time when people stop being so mentally adolescent such that we can have honest discussions about the mechanical realities of the time period, rather than just “Oh, [keyword]! Therefore [programmed response]!!”
The reasoning was valid but ….
It’s frustrating that we live in a world of adults who have a mindset such that it’s possible to denounce something, yet if you proceed to think critically about how things got to that point, even in the same sentence, you haven’t denounced it enough, and therefore endorse it!!!
It’s a retarded, infantile mindset, that belies the inability of a large group of people to engage in independent thought, and I hate it.
.. so I self censored. Let’s hurry up and win this damn war.
Thanks for your well thought out responses, I enjoyed reading them. You don’t need to win every word exchange and setting down the hatchet can be a good thing after a few exchanges when the other side won’t argue fairly.