Why do some Republicans get so worked up when people call America a democracy?

[NewJeffCT]

I saw a LTTE last week that said Obama was unqualified to be president because his website mentions America being a democracy instead of a republic. Meanwhile, I'm guessing most Republicans, including Herr George, have used the term democracy when referring to America.

[DemzRock]

1. Hmmm... I thought it was the GOP who have been lying about the US being a democracy for years

We ain't. We are a slightly Democratic Republic.

[TechBear_Seattle]

2. For starters, America is not and never has been a democracy

To say otherwise shows ignorance of how the US federal government works. I'm assuming that these Repugs are picking at nits and claiming that anyone who says the US is a democracy is too ignorant to hold the presidency. Then again, they thought Junior was smart enough to hold office, so who knows what (if?) they are thinking?

[NewJeffCT]

5. True, it is a Republic

but, the definitions are pretty close:

Democracy (from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy)
1 a: 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

Republic (also from the same site)
1 a (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 (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 (as a nation) having such a form of government

[TechBear_Seattle]

11. The distinction I learned in AP government class is...

In a democracy, the government is constituted by the people. In a republic, the government is constituted by a defined class of entities.

Venice was a republic because the government was constituted by several powerful families, thus creating an aristocratic republic. The United States, Canada and Germany are republics because the government is constituted by member states or provinces, thus creating federal republics.

There is a distinction between republican governments and representative democracies. One can argue that US states are republics of legislative districts, but consider: The borders of legislative districts are regularly redrawn to reflect changes in population; as a result, legislators representing those districts in the state government all represent approximately the same number of people. This is different from the US federal government, where state borders are not redrawn and states gain or lose representation in the House as a result of population shifts, leading to very large differences in the number of people a Representative represents.

As examples of actual democracies, we can look at Italy, France and even the UK.

[nels25]

17. IIFCC a famous quote from Ben Franklin

goes something like this.

When asked shortly after the ending for the Constitutional convention: "What kind of government did you give us?"

A: "A Republic, if you can keep it!"

I think I have that quote correct.

For the most part we have been able to maintain our republic in more or less good standing.

Have we had some less than stellar leadership (including the last 7 years) of course.

But then again whenever this nation seems to be in absolute need of quality leadership, it seems to be provided.

I am a optimist (see my avatar) I think that Barack can provide this leadership at this point in our nation's history.

We shall see.

:7

[GTurck]

10. By the mid-1800's

America was understood to be exactly what most of us think it is - a republican democracy. A sort of controlled democracy. This is not my idea but the words in the introduction to "The Anti-Federalists Papers". On page 6 editor of this book of essays by those opposed to some provisions of the Constitution, Ralph Ketcham says: "By 1787, republicanism, then, was positioned between monarchy and "mere democracy." ....Thus, while eighteenth century American republicanism was committed to the sovereignty of the people, it was also complicated approach to government."
Madison said:"You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.
So American was founded on conflicted and conflicting ideas of how to be both republic and democracy. But the Founders were using ideas about these things based on their literal translations rather than what was understood for centuries as to what they meant. In no way were they trying to recreate the Roman Republic or the democracy of Athens. Instead they saw a different path that has never had a real word attached to it. We simply call ourselves a democratic republic.

[CTyankee]

14. The Founders were also suspicious of "empires."

They saw republics as noble and cited Cincinnatus, a citizen of the Roman republic who left his plow to fight for Rome and then returned to his land. Empire meant decay and corruption.

[TechBear_Seattle]

15. In a "democratic republic," democracy is an adjective and not the form of government

I've never heard of a "democratic republic." My understanding is that the US is a federal republic, as our national government is a federation of states.

[GTurck]

19. Yes and no..

The Founders were very suspicious of empire but knowing the Roman model so well they saw the dangers there too. Their idea was to not have a class of men who were expected to be senators with revolving tribunes, etc as leaders but for there to be a way for the best of all Americans no matter where they started from to have a chance to be in offices of power. That is a stand out difference from Rome. In Rome to become a senator you had to be a member of the Senatorial Class which was a sub-set of the Patricians. That was maybe 5% of 20% of all Romans. Over time it became possible to buy your seat in the Senate by being super-rich but there were never any elections by the people for this office. It would have been unthinkable to have judgment passed on those Senators-to-be by having plebeians vote for them. Now translate that all into today's terms and it will be easier to understand what a profound difference the founders of our nation intended.
But I am sorry for not having provided more of the quotes from "The Anti-Federalist Papers". I was trying to be brief.
p.6:"This republicanism of the 1780's was not in principle different from what in Britain and America by mid-nineteenth century was generally called representative democracy. The founders would not have been opposed to the modern connotation of the word "democracy," nor would they have used the word "republic" to mark out a distinction from those connotations. In scorning "democracy," eighteenth century theorists had in mind Aristotle's picture of a heedless, emotional, manipulated populace that would still be denigrated by most modern democratic theorists."
Thanks for the comments. It think it is essential that this sort of conversation is engaged.
Thanks to Ralph Ketcham who wrote the quote above for helping me understand our founding better too.

[iconoclastic cat]

3. Maybe because it really is a republic. nt

[stahbrett]

4. the gist of it is this:

A true democracy would mean that all decisions would be made by the people via majority rule. So if 50.1% of the people decided that black people should not be able to marry white people, then that would be it.

Instead we have a constitution, which limits the powers of the government, and (via the amendments mostly) lists various rights that the states and people inherently have. And we elect congress-critters to represent our interests (the intent was for the House to represent the people, and the Senate to represent the interests of the states).

The constitution protects the rights of the minority in many ways. For example, just because 50.1% of the people may think that it's a good idea to have Christian prayer in public schools, the constitution makes it clear that the government should not be in the business of endorsing religion.

[bryant69]

6. I think they get worked up because Obama is a Democrat

and so pounce on whatever nitpicking thing they possibly can.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[underpants]

7. Beware a Republican who leads with "Well if you study history..."

because almost to a 100% certainty you are about to hear some level of revisionist history. Newt loves to lead with this line. Hell they have a concerted effort to claim that Mai Lai never happened.

That being said this Republic/Democracy thing isn't, as far as I can tell, about the names of the parties it has to do with them thinking they have a WINNER a real zinger in an argument that does effectively throw people off and that is really all that Republicans can hope for.

Other notable things about Republicans/conservatives

-don't "get" satire or irony (test someone out on this it is a true test of their belief and I have NO IDEA why this is this way)
-two things you will never hear from Fox News and anyother Repub mouthpiece
1. Call your Senator or Representative-they have spent lots of money to paint any and all governments as "the problem" so you finding out that the government can do something doesn't help them out
2. come on down a volunteer!- they have a hierarchy of issues and talking points (Norquist's weekly meeting) and they don't need YOU coming in an offering your take on anything. Just do as you are told.

[peacetalksforall]

8. Dupe

[peacetalksforall]

9. Since our number one export is democracy - delivered with lectures,

bribery, massacres, homelessness, mass graves, torture, torment, missing body limbs-organs-peace of mond, bargains/deals with the devils, theft, usury, betrayals, revenge, decades long embargos. That's our export. I thought Repugs and lemmings loved it when Bush lectured on making other countries just like us. They must become democracies. Even Dem leaders. Such a joke.

You can be sure that however repugs define it, it's designed to fit with the new Constitution that was written by the Federalist Society that they are implementing each day - executive orders. VP being unaccountable to anyone. Corporate rule. Profit for a few.

I like that:
Corporate rule.
Profit for a few.

We are grim reapers. We must wake up.

The little people of this country can relate to the little people of other countries. Our problems are our leaders who scorn us.

[CTyankee]

16. It is instructive to learn from the example of Athens, the world's first democracy.

Athens also wanted to "export democracy" when it started on its disastrous Sicilian campaign, so eloquently described by an onlooker, Thucydides, in his "History of the Peloponnesian War." He wrote it as a warning to other nations. There is a reason that this book is studied at our war colleges.

The outcome of that war was that Athens lost its empire and, for a period of time, its democracy (it was only partially restored). Athens, the glowingly described democracy, was certainly flawed as it excluded women and slaves, but it was also a society where debate was practiced and people's lives were not controlled by the state compared to totalitarian Sparta. Athens lost the war, Sparta won.

It's all laid out in this book written 2500 years ago. The "exporting democracy" meme was a crock then and it is now. Athens wanted to grab the strategic and lucrative island of Sicily and basically became overstretched in a land too far from the homeland. Sparta sank Athens' magnificent fleet in the harbor of Siricusa and it was over...

[OHdem10]

12. In Republic , the Representativesof the people can and do

use their own beliefs of what is good for the country---they
are not bound to vote as their constituency tells them to vote.

In a Democracy they would be bound to vote as their constituency
desires them to vote on an issue.

How do you think the Corporatists got Control. Senators and Representatives
voted their individual consciences not the wishes of their constituents.

This is the way a Republic works and they are in their legal rights.

Why, you say??? Democracy as seen by some would be mob rule.
Who wants the riff raff making decisions??

Think about it--Only property owners could vote originally. These
old practices die hard.

Overall, How often do you hear the comment---I do not agree with
him/her on policy but I like and respect him. This shows the
inherent quality in Americans to submit their priorities to others.
This is why we can have a whole election and very little in depth
discussion of policies takes place.

[Senator]

13. They've Been Trained By (Neo)Fascist Propaganda Meme (As Have Many Non-Repubs)

Note: I have pasted this response more than a few times over the years. It is not intended to single out any poster here who has fallen into this propaganda trap (as some have), but rather to answer the question. And yes, this has been a pet peeve of mine for some time now.

-----Paste-----

I fear you may be tangled up a bit in the dreaded "Not a democracy, but a Republic" meme. It's something that sounds reasonable but in reality is nearly devoid of content -- a particularly insidious type of propaganda. And in fact, neofascist propaganda. What makes the phrase so troublesome is not really what it says -- but rather what it implies without actually saying.

The word "republic" simply means "non-monarchy" (which would be a kingdom). Cuba is a Republic and the "evil empire" was the USSR(epublics). They also have/had constitutions. And since the US is not a monarchy, we are certainly a republic. But that's not really saying anything substantive.

The only real content in the statement is "not a democracy," which in addition to being false about the US -- implies something derogatory about democracy or democracies (and thus about America and Americans). The implication is that there is some "other thing" that is better than a democracy. The purpose is to allow people to fill that void with whatever vague notion they'd like to: presumably some form of a theocracy, or autocracy, or "our side"-ocracy.

It sets up a false dichotomy between "Bad Democracy" vs. "Something Good." Also, on a rhetorical level it projects a Democra(tic Party is bad) vs. Republic(an Party is good) subliminal message.

In an attempt to save time, I'll describe the next step in this argument (as I have had this discussion before).

Next comes an attempt to claim that "representative democracy" itself is somehow not democracy. And that this is the "other thing" that the founders wanted and agreed to, in order to avoid the dreaded "mob rule." The reality is that there has never been, nor could there be, a "non-representative" democracy. Not even in ancient democracies was there ever a situation that could be considered "direct democracy" (i.e., "mob rule"). It's simply not workable.

But the "mob rule" threat is simply a bogeyman. Again, the intent is the same. To disseminate a message of "democracy is bad," without revealing that what is being promoted is some nonspecified form of fascism -- minority rule.

----- End Paste-----

The anger comes from their unconscious recognition -- when simply challenged by the word itself -- that all they believe is really anti-democratic, and thus Anti-American. And that what they call patriotism is something that might more accurately referred to as "patrionics."

Hope this helps.

--

[Winterblues]

18. Does Bush* know this?

He is activly fighting for Democracies all around the world or so he says quite loudly..There is very little distinction between a Democratic Republic and a Representative Democracy. In all scenerios people get to vote on how they are governed.

[B Calm]

20. The USA is both. It's a democratic republic!

and America is a continent, not a country!