Is it true that “The United States is a republic, not a democracy?” If so, what does that mean?

As far as I have been able to tell this statement originated during the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower, or shortly thereafter. It may have originated with the John Birch Society.

In 1952 Eisenhower was elected president by a landslide. The Republicans won majorities in both houses of Congress. For the first time since 1929 the Republican Party controlled the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives.

Reactionaries hoped that the Senate and the House of Representatives, under the leadership of President Eisenhower, would repeal the reforms of the New Deal. This did not happen because Eisenhower recognized that the New Deal Reforms had broad, popular support.

When reactionaries begrudgingly agreed, they concluded that popular opinion did not matter, because the United States was never intended to be a democracy.

(I use the noun “reactionaries” because those who deny that the U.S. government is or should be a democracy would like to repeal the basic economic reforms of the twentieth century. Such people wish not to conserve, but to uproot.)

Those arguing that the United States is a republic, but not a democracy begin their argument by stating that the United States Constitution includes the passage, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government," but does not mention the word “democracy.”

The Constitution was controversial when it was presented. In order to promote ratification Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays to justify the Constitution. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison signed the Constitution. James Madison wrote much of it.

These essays have been compiled into The Federalist Papers.

In Federalist Paper #10 James Madison describes what he means by “democracy,” and contrasts a democracy with a republic. He describes a democracy as, “a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person.” That kind of government existed for a time in ancient Athens. It existed during Madison’s lifetime in New England townships, where it continues to exist.

Madison goes on to write, “The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government in the latter to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens and greater sphere of country over which the latter may be extended.”

It should be obvious that what Madison meant by “republic” is what we recognize as “representative democracy.”

Thomas Jefferson, who wrote The Declaration of Independence, did not take part in the deliberations over the Constitution because he was in France at the time.

In Thomas Jefferson’s letter to Isaac H. Tiffany, written August 26, 1816, from Monticello, explicitly described the U.S. government as a representative democracy. Jefferson wrote:

“The introduction of this new principle of representative democracy has rendered useless almost everything written before on the structure of government; and, in a great measure, relieves our regret, if the political writings of Aristotle, or of any other ancient, have been lost, or are unfaithfully rendered or explained to us. My most earnest wish is to see the republican element of popular control pushed to the maximum of its practicable exercise. I shall then believe that our government may be pure and perpetual. Accept my respectful salutations.”
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/letter-to-isaac-h-tiffany/

The following definitions from Merriam-Webster make it clear that there is no contradiction between a republic and a democracy, and that the U.S. government is both. It should be equally clear that the British government is both a monarchy and a democracy.


Definition of republic

1a (1) : a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president

(2) : a political unit (such as a nation) having such a form of government

b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law

(2) : a political unit (such as a nation) having such a form of government

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/republic


Definition of democracy

1a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority

b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

2: a political unit that has a democratic government

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy

 

It's not that hard to understand. A country that is a Republic, has a Constitution or Charter/Bill of Rights that protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters.

Kind of like how newly elected leftwing liberals try to forcibly take away a citizens right to own firearms, but the second amendment always gets in their way.

In a pure democracy, the government is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the people with little recourse until the next election .....

 

Bullshit
In a pure democracy the government is restrained , like any other , by the rule of law.
There are so many varieties , but they are all forms of democracy , and generally , each as pure as the other.

Whether a country chooses to be a republic , or not , doesn't change it being a democracy if it is one.

We have this "should we be a republic" comes up here quite often , and general opinion seems to be that we will eventually , but there is no debate about being a democracy.
All it would mean is a change in who is head of state , and how they're selected , basically.
So the Queen would no longer be , as she is nominally now , represented by a Governor General .
This system has already been changed in recent years , in that we now choose own GG , from our own citizens , to represent the Queen.
Originally the Queen appointed him from her citizens.

Whether you call your basic laws of rights and so on a Constitution ,
a Bill of Rights , or whatever ,
doesn't change the fact that in a democracy , every government is constrained by the countries rule of law.
How you deal with any rogue government will depend in the law and the people.

Here and in Australia , the GG can deal with it ,
dissolve parliament ,
dismiss the government ,
or something like that.
I'm no expert , but there are measures and procedures.

There are plenty of examples of democratic governments being brought down before 'the next scheduled election' ,
because they got things wrong ,
including here and in Australia ,
England , and many other places.

 

The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately.

A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.” (Benjamin Franklin)

 

So what? There is no contradiction between a republic and a democracy.

 

The United States Constitution was founded by rich white men who often owned slaves. They were well educated for their time, and more enlightened than European aristocracies.

Nevertheless, our present electorate is composed of men and women of all income levels and various races. Contemporary voters have no moral obligation to share the economic concerns of rich white eighteenth century American men.

The strength of the United States Constitution is not that it commands all of us to support institutions and laws that only benefit rich white men. The strength of the Constitution is that it has been flexible enough to respond to changing times and evolving concerns.

The Preamble of the Constitution reads:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare [emphasis mine], and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

When written "promote the general Welfare" did not mean "provide for a well funded public sector of the economy paid for by steeply progressive taxation." For the present, that is a legitimate interpretation.

 

Republic?
Democracy?
A distinction without a difference.

 

It's being run as a dictatorship. Elected officials used to work for the people. Not anymore. Now they are threatened into following blindly like sheep.

 

I see your confusion and I'll raise it.

The United States of America has a Constitution that limits the federal fucking government's power, and it is not a ''central fucking government''.

A democracy however is/has a central fucking government, and has all central power.

The key here is '' United States'', with an emphasis on ''UNTIED'' , the individual States have the centralized power within itself, the States are a democracy where popular vote wins the election.

Whereas the States Delegates decide the President of the U.S., individual States elections determine the States representatives, on a National level

I have explained this several times to you, yet you wish to remain confused on the form of Government the U.S. has.

The United States of America is in fact a ''CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC'', as a Nation.

The federal fucking government was strictly created for international commerce, inner-state commerce, and national defense, not to create entitlements, under the false premise of the General Welfare Clause.

The differences between a Republic and a Democracy are stark, and well defined.

If you so choose to ignore what this countries form of government is, you can do it, it's your prerogative to do so....but, dont continue to translate to folks that this country is a democracy, it makes you appear very uninformed.

 

America is a democracy, in that it's not a monarchy or a dictatorship. ... To be sure, in addition to being a representative democracy, the United States is also a constitutional democracy, in which courts restrain in some measure the democratic will. And the United States is therefore also a constitutional republic.Nov 14, 2016
The United States is both a 'republic' and a 'democracy' — because ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com › news

 

You can't really get much plainer than that.
Any way you look at it ,
the US is a democracy ,
and the above is the simplest explanation of why.
You can twist explanations however you like , but you can't get away from the fact that the US is governed by people who are elected , one way or another , by the people.

In fact , between states officials and governance and central officials and governance , you seem to spend your whole lives choosing candidates , enduring campaigns , voting , and then starting again preparing for the next round in another level of your overall governance ,
until your back at the beginning , to start all over again.

 

In a Pure Democracy all laws are debated and passed by all citizens. Voting is mandatory and serving is required. This will not work in the world in which we now live. So we hire people for a set time period to pass laws for everyone. Voting is requested but not required nor is serving in government. Unlike the English system where an elected government can be brought down simply a vote of no confidence the U.S. has elections at set times. The Executive is elected to enforce the law. The Congress passes laws and the Supreme Court is the final decision maker about the legality of law.

 

Direct democracy,

sometimes called "pure democracy,"

is a form of democracy in which all laws and policies imposed by governments are determined by the people themselves, rather than by representatives who are elected by the people.

In a true direct democracy,
all laws, bills
and even court decisions
are voted on by all citizens

 

The statement originated about 20 seconds after the Constitution was ratified.

In the strictest sense of the definitions, the US is a democratic Republic.

A republic is a form of government where citizens appoint people to perform the functions of government. The people who have to power of appointment may not represent the entire citizenry. The Roman Republic was ruled by the Senate, which was a hereditary body. The Senate appointed Consuls, which was the administrative executive, and other officers of government.

In a democratic republic, the general citizenry elects government officials. These officials are expected to use their own judgment for day to day affairs, without needing a referendum from the people. Although an elected official is generally expected to bow the will of the people, or at least the sentiment of the day, there is no law which says he/she must.

An elected official has the power to make any decision, based on any reasoning, within the law.

 

The U.S. Constitution was designed to require super majorities to make major legal and institutional changes. Now that President Trump and the Republican Congress want to cut taxes for the rich and to repeal environmental regulations I can see the wisdom in that.

Nevertheless, the U.S. Constitution has permitted a continuing expansion of the public sector of the economy, because most Americans want that. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution would prevent a super majority from repealing the Second Amendment and prohibiting the private ownership of firearms.

 

An amendment can only be repealed by the passage of a reversing amendment. This requires 3/4s of the States to ratify the amendment. While this is a super majority of states, each state would only need a simple majority of legislators to ratify.

On the other hand, the Supreme Court could simply read the 2nd Amendment and decide to interpret it as it is written and achieve much the same effect.

 

According to your own poll DL...(as I know you adore opinion polls)...;

1. Is the United States' government a democracy?
   1. Yes
      1 vote(s)
      14.3%
   2. *
      No
      4 vote(s)
      57.1%
   3. The United States' government is not a democracy, but it should be.
      1 vote(s)
      14.3%
   4. The United States' government is a democracy, but it should not be.
      0 vote(s)
      0.0%
   5. Other - please explain
      1 vote(s)
      14.3%
   6. Don't know, no opinion
      0 vote(s)
      0.0%

57% know the U.S. is NOT demoracy, would that be enougfh for you to change your mind on the subject?

Or will you choose to remain closed minded, because the 57% are stupid?