Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.
A republic is a government of law under a Constitution. The Constitution holds the government in check and prevents the majority (acting through their government) from violating the rights of the individual. Under this system of government a lynch mob is illegal. The suspected criminal cannot be denied his right to a fair trial even if a majority of the citizenry demands otherwise.
This has been debated multiple times on this forum. America is a Consitutional Republic. The word "democracy" is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.
We elect representatives, not actual laws or actions, on our behalf. Thus we are a representative democracy. Besides only those that vote are represented by the knuckleheads in DC. Many millions do not even bother to vote.
We elect representatives, not actual laws or actions, on our behalf. Thus we are a representative democracy. Besides only those that vote are represented by the knuckleheads in DC. Many millions do not even bother to vote.
We are a Constitutional Republic as another poster already stated.
A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.
A republic is a government of law under a Constitution. The Constitution holds the government in check and prevents the majority (acting through their government) from violating the rights of the individual. Under this system of government a lynch mob is illegal. The suspected criminal cannot be denied his right to a fair trial even if a majority of the citizenry demands otherwise.
The type of government we have is not debatable; it's a Constitutional Republic. Should we assume that what you are actually asking is, what type of government SHOULD we have?
A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.
A republic is a government of law under a Constitution. The Constitution holds the government in check and prevents the majority (acting through their government) from violating the rights of the individual. Under this system of government a lynch mob is illegal. The suspected criminal cannot be denied his right to a fair trial even if a majority of the citizenry demands otherwise.
As they say in Texas, "We don't just hang people. We give then a trial and THEN we hang them."
Representative democracy that happens to also be a republic. It is not an either/or thing. We elect Senators, House members, and the President. The definitions given up top seem pretty bogus and biased.
And it works. Recall when Clinton was impeached by the house (democracy), and the Senate did not go along? That is because as representatives, they did not feel pursuing the passions of the people was necessary in that case. Censure was sufficient. I think our current situation has both elements of course, democratic elections, with a bit of autonomy by the representatives and of course the Constitution to provide guidance too.
Not sure what the point is to debating two misleading definitions though.
The type of government we have is not debatable; it's a Constitutional Republic. Should we assume that what you are actually asking is, what type of government SHOULD we have?
No, after reading the forum here and debating the usual left vs right argument It is my firm belief that there are many here who do not KNOW!
Now they will answer republic after reading the definition but that is a good thing..
I am tired of seeing posts saying we are a democracy!
The type of government we have is not debatable; it's a Constitutional Republic. Should we assume that what you are actually asking is, what type of government SHOULD we have?
yeah, its kind of funny to see the question asked.
Representative democracy that happens to also be a republic. It is not an either/or thing. We elect Senators, House members, and the President. The definitions given up top seem pretty bogus and biased.
And it works. Recall when Clinton was impeached by the house (democracy), and the Senate did not go along? That is because as representatives, they did not feel pursuing the passions of the people was necessary in that case. Censure was sufficient. I think our current situation has both elements of course, democratic elections, with a bit of autonomy by the representatives and of course the Constitution to provide guidance too.
Not sure what the point is to debating two misleading definitions though.
So you feel that the consitution provides guidance rather then a frame work?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
