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.
Article credited to a Alexander Tyler, professor of civil history at Edinburgh University in the late 18th Century.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury. The result is that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200-years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: from bondage to Spiritual faith; from Spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back into bondage."
Is this an accurate assessment and where does America today stand in this sequence?
(Yes, I know America is considered a Republic, not a Democracy)
Switzerland, Venice, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom had limited forms of self-representation for centuries before the US even existed. I would not use the 200 year mark as a rule of thumb.
However it does seem as if the broader the franchise, the more redistributive the politics. And I do agree that redistributive politics eventually bankrupts the state. Whether dictatorship follows is debatable. That was the case for the ancient Greek democracies, but it need not be the case. A less redistributive politics will be necessary to right the ship of state, and that will probably require a less representative government as there will be more losers than winners.
A recent example of this was Detroit's bankruptcy and the placement of the city under state control, with a limitation on the powers of elected officials. Or in Europe, the control exercised over the Greek government by Germany via banks and the EU when Greece went de facto bankrupt.
Detroit voters subsequently elected a reformist mayor, so democracy can right itself without the iron fist of a dictator. Greek voters still seem to be playing games with themselves and toying with the far left and far right, but then again Greece is the original home of failed democracies.
Then oligarchies and other unequal coercive regimes should be the most stable and long living but it is not the case, probably that's a reason why American oligarchy prefers democratic clothes.
Good thing we're not a Democracy then....we're a Representative Republic!
USA was a representative republic 200 years ago when only propertied white men cast their votes. Once voting became universal "representative" became a hollow term since elected officials, as a rule, do not resemble their voter' background nor do they care about their voter' interests (which tend to be the opposite to their self-interests). Elections become little more than mindless manipulation fest.
Then oligarchies and other unequal coercive regimes should be the most stable and long living but it is not the case, probably that's a reason why American oligarchy prefers democratic clothes.
Historically it is the case that oligarchies and monarchies are more stable. They have governed for most of history.
Well by that logic, one can argue that bands of hunters & foragers are more stable.
The difference is that we once had democracy and then it disappeared for a long time. Why did democracy mostly disappear for 1800 years? After the end of the Roman Republic and before the French Revolution?
And why did it take thousands of years after the start of political organization for democracy to take root in classical Athens?
Democracy is a political sweet spot but it's hard to get there and hard to maintain.
(Yes, I know America is considered a Republic, not a Democracy)
Actually, you do not know.
America is promised a REPUBLICAN FORM which is not synonymous with a republic.
The simple reason is that in a democracy (or a republic), the 51% majority can oppress the 49% minority.
In a republican form, no majority can supersede the individual's Creator endowed rights to life, liberty, etc, etc.
REPUBLIC - A commonwealth; That form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens. In another sense, it signifies the state, independent of its form of government.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 1302
A republic is not synonymous with a republican form of government.
The People's Republic of China is a republic but not a republican form.
Voting and holding public office is a privilege granted to subject citizens, not sovereign people.
REPUBLICAN FORM
GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government)- One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people,... directly...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695
In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627.
"... at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves[.]"
- - - Justice John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 2 Dall. 419 419 (1793)
DEMOCRATIC FORM
DEMOCRACY - That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 432
The key distinguishing feature between a republican and democratic form is sovereignty.
In the republican form, the PEOPLE individually are sovereign and directly exercise that power.
In the democratic form, the "whole body of citizens" indirectly exercise it via representation.
But in truth, democratic majorities override the individual, so no individual's rights are secure. And citizens are obligated to perform civic duties, so they are subjects - not sovereigns.
And if you will please note, "republic" refers to the government whose administration is open to all citizens - which is certainly not a reference to sovereign people in a republican form.
Summed up, Americans are promised a republican form, but most shift to the democratic form, and exercise political liberty (voting, holding office). That most Americans do not know how and when they gave consent is a victory for the world's greatest propaganda machine.
If ever 97% of Americans decided to WITHDRAW CONSENT, and restore their sovereign status under the republican form of government, the administration would collapse in a New York Minute.
Why?
No endowed rights can be taxed, regulated, or infringed.
That pretty much wipes out the revenue stream and the authority of the government to go beyond securing endowed rights (adjudicating disputes, prosecuting criminals, defending against all enemies, foreign or domestic).
And folks who withdraw from citizenship also cease to participate in Socialist InSecurity, which also wipes that abominable system off the map.
The people that were brain washed by the schooling system continually refer to our system of government as a democracy.
What we have is a represented republic at all federal levels. We don't vote for any federal bills or policy's, we vote for representatives, senators, and president to represent us. We do have a democracy form of government at the state level.
Yes, democracy can not survive but we are not a democracy.
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.