How many times do we hear American’s describe themselves as “living in a democracy?” I am guilty of it too and I know the difference, for the United States is not a democracy but in fact is a representative or constitutional republic.
Basically the practical differences are as follows: In a democracy the majority rules totally and the individual and minorities (political, NOT racial) have no protections from the will of the majority.
A republic differs in that it is subject to a constitution and that constitution upholds the rights of individuals and minorities equally to the will of the majority, and the constitution limits government powers.
Can the reader see the definite difference? Democracy does not protect minorities, whereas republics are constituted to do precisely that. Democracy is a more direct relationship from voter to lawmaker, whereas in republics the direct relationship from citizen to lawmaker is shielded by the constitution.
My thesis in this piece is that Republicans are naturally more in favor of the republic than others are. Democrats are misplaced in the American system, as we are not a democracy in the terms the moniker Democrat implies. The name “Democrat” leaves one with the impression that to be a “Democrat” is to be closely wed to the American system as constituted, but that is not accurate.
The facts are, and please use my links to check up on me, Republicans are the more closely wed ideology to the American system. Republicans favor the republic as constituted, at least in theory, RINO’s notwithstanding. Democrats are, according to the philosophical aspects, more desirous of direct responsibility to the people, whereas Republicans are more wed to the constitutional limitations.
Democrats will openly advocate interpreting constitutions to suit their wishes, whereas Republicans will only advocate such by first using the constitution as a filter. Republicans will only accept such interpretations by the constitutionally proscribed method of amending the document to accept changes wished for by the majorities. The differences cannot be overstated here.
It is therefore an odd turn of political history, and in fact a complete revisionist history, that Republican’s could in any way be attacked for adhering first to a constitution over wishes of the citizens. For the edification of the reader, the Republican mindset is the proper one for our form of government, as we are a republic and not a democracy.
It is easy for citizens to “feel” something need be done about whatever the topic is, but Republicans do not find that “feeling” sufficient to alter the system, and like it or not, our system is designed to be as Republican’s interpret it. If we lived in a direct democracy, which we do not, then the Democrat Party’s point of view, that “feeling” some adjustment need be mandated, would be the appropriate one.
Republican’s can have the exact same feelings that some inequity exists, but Republican’s will not, by their very ideology, accept that popular sentiment is sufficient to effect the spoken for change. Republican’s instead insist that any “alterations” to current lawful practice be effected only by changing and adhering to the law. Republican’s do not find a “feeling” or “need” sufficient to cause a change to be undertaken unless first done so through the lawful means.
In our system that is done by amending the constitution and not by reinterpreting it. Despite the chatter of some, the Founding documents are not to be reinterpreted to suit current mores or desires, but must be amended to change intent.
It is a real shame that the facts of the Founding and the factual knowledge of the system we live under – a republic – do not support the wishes of those who favor running our republic as if it were a democracy. We are a republic and for it to operate as designed, it should be run as designed. I mean we do not fly a plane like we drive a car, right? We operate planes as planes are to be operated. To try and operate a plane as one would a car would lead to disaster, no?
And so it is with trying to run a republic as if it were a democracy. I cannot state emphatically enough that dreadfully for many folks this is a real source of confusion and it also leads complete mismanagement, evidenced by the way the progressives run this nation. Our leaders try and run this republic as if it were a democracy, and the mess we see is directly the fault of both parties lawmakers using populism to run a republic.
Populism is a tenet of democracies and not republics. When republics are run as they are supposed to be, according to the Constitution, all is well. Our system will and is currently breaking down precisely because a populist attitude creeps into progressive ruling. That will not now nor ever work in a republic. So the solutions to our mess is for our lawmakers of both parties to govern as the republic we are. To allow populist thought to morph our Constitutional Republic into a democracy is not only wrong and improper, and it is as evidenced by all we see around us, but is also a terrible and ineffective manner of administering a nation – a republic and NOT a democracy, mind you.
This nation’s path will be righted when the laws are the guide and not any populist desire. Read the links and learn the difference. Failure to accept these facts will lead to more misery. The longer progressives rule this land as something it is not nor ever was, nor was designed to be, the longer the misery will last.