What is the difference between a representative democracy and a republic?

Posted by XenokRoy 5 years, 1 month ago to Politics
97 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

I see posts often that state that we (USA) were not created to be a democracy (I think they mean Representative Democracy when this is said.)

I do not think people often have thought through what the difference really is, and how did our country change from a republic to a representative democracy, or have we made that change?

What are your thoughts about which we are, and what would be needed to be one or the other? Should we be one or the other or should we be a hybrid of the two?

Definitions:
May help in the discussion

Democracy: government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

Republic: a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 12
    Posted by Herb7734 5 years, 1 month ago
    The USA was founded as a Constitutional Republic.
    Anything else is a distortion of the original intent of those who put up their lives and sacred honor to create the first almost free state ever put forth on the planet. (Not counting possibilities of pre-history).
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by edweaver 5 years, 1 month ago
      From my studies this is my belief as well. There are many reasons for our downfall but mostly our elected representatives have failed to uphold the constitution. In fact most have forgotten that it even exists.

      Last night I hear on the radio of a survey that said 70% of people born after 1980 do not think saving our form of government is important. Scary but not surprising. We are seeing the results.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ ObjectiveAnalyst 5 years, 1 month ago
      Indeed Herb7734,
      The founders held democracies in contempt. For those looking for substantiation of this, one need only read their own words. They were learned men who often quoted Montesquieu, Locke etc. Their words still resonate in the Federalist, Anti-federalist and Constitutional convention papers. Too few people today invest their time in these worthy and enlightening records of their knowledge, intentions and powerful arguments.
      Regards,
      O.A.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 5 years, 1 month ago
        Because of our representative system, people get the word democracy all tangled up in the description of the USA. If the USA were a democracy the representatives would be chosen based solely on population. Our "democracy" has a set of rules as to how things are done with population only a component of the entire process. That, of course, is The Constitution. Actually, the Founders kept it all quite simple. Even with the addition of the Bill of Rights as amendments. What makes it seem complicated to almost the point of incomprehension is all the putzing around that has been done, amended, ruled, and opinionized about it. Just take the Constitution and the 1st 10 amendments and put the wording in modern syntax, and you might be amazed at how clear-cut and easy it is to comprehend.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 5 years, 1 month ago
    A democracy (in pure form) is mob rule. What I
    advocate is a constitutional republic, in which in-
    dividual rights are guaranteed. (Our nation was an
    attempt at that, but it has not been established
    consistently).
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Suzanne43 5 years, 1 month ago
      The old story...there are two foxes and one hen trying to decide on what to have for dinner. They take a vote. In a true democracy, guess what would happen. You have to have a rule of law and moral values.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 5 years, 1 month ago
        Many years ago, the following example was told to me. It is powerful because it is so personal.
        You're walking along with your wife. Three men approach. They say they want to rape your wife. They vote on it. They win, 3 to 2. That's democracy.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 5 years, 1 month ago
    A republic usually has the "will of the people" represented by regional officials (elected senators, in our case), while a representative democracy has representatives determined by regional population size (elected representatives, in our case). Because of flawed history of pure democracies (like ancient Greece) and republics (like the Roman empire), our founders sought to balance regional representation with numerical representation in a bicameral legislature, the Congress.

    Originally, the senators were chosen by the state legislatures, elected by the people of their state, but that was changed to direct election with the 17th amendment.

    The original intent was for the House of Representatives to express the desires of the voters directly and swiftly, while the Senate was to be a more careful, deliberative body that considered the impact of House-proposed legislative measures and budgets on the republic and their respective regions. IMHO, the 17th amendment interfered with that model, by making the senators more responsive to party than state.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 1 month ago
      Amen and well said. The 17th Amendment was a knee-jerk response with devastating consequences. The results have been more centralization of power in the Federal Government and less State sovereignty. IMO, the 17th was one of the worst Amendments to have been passed and any Constitutional Convention ought to introduce another Amendment repealing it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Butched 5 years, 1 month ago
        I agree that the 17th amendment doomed us. The senate was elected by each state with equal representation . 2 senators per state. They were originally installed to protect the rights of the state they were from. Now they are thought of protecting federal rights over states rights. Things would be far different had we stuck to this. Repeal of the 17th amendment is the only way to right the course of this country. Without its repeal we are doomed to a political federal government.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 5 years, 1 month ago
          I would add two other items to this that really changed the structure of the government.

          To vote, until the women's suffrage movement, required that you were a land owner. That was the key to us being a republic and not a democracy. The privilege of voting was tied to land ownership, to being a stakeholder.

          The third item, when we moved from Governor or legislator appointees to the electoral college that then voted for president. Think about this, the first time Obama was running, if the apontee system were still used the primary concern was the economy. What are the odds that half or more the appointee to the electoral college would have been economists. Now look at Obama's skill set on the economy and think, would he have had a chance? This too was a change from a republic form of election for the president to a democracy form of election.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by jetgraphics 5 years, 1 month ago
            You are mistaken.
            Prior to 1820s, an elector had to be a consenting citizen, property owner, tax payer.
            After the 1820s, the requirement to be a property owner and tax payer was lifted, and any warm body (male) could vote, thus started the decline into the current People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America.
            . . . .
            Reference:
            . . . .
            Massachusetts
            Constitution of 1780, Section III. House of Representatives
            IV. Every male person, being twenty-one years of age, and resident in any particular town in this Commonwealth for the space of one year having a freehold estate (that is, property owned outright) within the same town, of the annual income of three pounds, or any estate of the value of sixty pounds, shall have a right to vote....

            Amendment of 1821
            Article III. Every male citizen of twenty-one years of age and upwards who shall have resided within the commonwealth one year, and within the town or district in which he may claim a right to vote, six calendar months and who shall have paid, by himself or his parent, master or guardian, any state or county tax; and also, every citizen who shall be, by law, exempted from taxation, and who shall be, in all other respects, qualified as above mentioned, shall have a right to vote; and no other person shall be entitled to vote in such election.

            Most states have similar amendments.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 1 month ago
      It destroyed the checks and balances system and along with the fascist income tax paved the way to becoming the USSA. But I never thought the military would become part of that effort.

      Is there no shame anywhere?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LarryHeart 5 years, 1 month ago
    Any form of Democracy - Effectively the Rule of the majority. No voice in governance and Oppression of the minority.

    Republic - The founders wanted a government whose business was the people Res Publica. They wanted to limit the power of the Federal government to control the people and forbade direct tax. Only the States would fund the Federal Government not the Citizens.
    The central government was split into three separate powers to further limit the power of the Central government.
    400+ Representatives of the people in the House. 100 of the States in a Senate formed a congress with the SOLE authority and power to make laws. A president who was to administrate and be commander in chief and a Justice of 9 individuals - elected for life to prevent outside influence - to Judge and resolve differences in the Laws of the Congress. At the insistence of Some a Bill of Constraints was added to further specify what the government may not do. (No Rights are granted in the Constitution, Rights come from the Supreme Being as per the Declaration of Independence and are self-evident)

    All this was put into a constitution to control the government, that all branches swear to uphold.

    At Washington's farewell address, written by James Madison, he warned about never allowing factions or parties.

    Aaron Burr wanted power and played party politics. Jefferson formed a party to oppose the new party's power and that was the end of representative government by the people and the separation of powers.

    Monarchy - The de facto current form of government of the USA - Government by Political Party. Since there are only two, there are only two voices - Rule by the royal couple Democrat and Republican party. There is no representation of the people other than specific reps of the Parties, which makes very little difference in what the party does . One or the other party always rules.
    When one Party is in power across the various branches it joins the branches into one and there is no separation or balance of powers.

    http://www.TheSocietyProject.org For the full history of where we went wrong and how to fix the problems by Constitutional Amendment Repeal and Repair (CARR)
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 years, 1 month ago
      LarryHeart,

      Great post, the kind of thing I was looking for with the questions asked, also a very cool link. I looked over it briefly but will have to do far more.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by gmcase 5 years, 1 month ago
    The simple answer is that a democracy is when two wolves and a sheep are voting on what is for dinner. It is the same in a constiutional repulbic exceot the sheep is armed.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 5 years, 1 month ago
    our republic suffered a shift towards becoming a
    democracy when the federal senate changed to
    individual voter election rather than State Legislature
    selection -- the 17th amendment -- and it may not have
    been wise. . a democracy allows a majority to vote
    themselves freebies, willy-nilly. . that's where we are,
    these days, isn't it? -- j
    .
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Lysander 5 years, 1 month ago
      Actually, I tell my students that 1913 is the end of the republic, 16 and 17 Amendments, and then the FED. Direct election, income tax, and national control of $, the Founders and Framers haven't stopped rolling in their graves.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Joseph23006 5 years, 1 month ago
    It was Ben Franklin, if memory serves me correctly, replied to the question, "What form of government have you given us?", at the end of the Convention. "Madam," he supposedly replied, "a Republic, if you can keep it!" Unfortunately, many are trying to throw away that concept because it is cumbersom eo enact laws, which was the idea, and makes the use of executive orders abhorrant to Constitutionalists.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mia767ca 5 years, 1 month ago
    we were founded as a republic...think about it the next time you do the pledge of allegiance... "and to the republic for which it stands"...
    what is special about a republic is that the right to participate is EARNED...there is no automatic right to vote...it is earned by producers...

    democracy leads to oligarchy and fascism...when everyone has the right to vote when they turn 18, you end up with tyranny of the majority and whatever smooth talking politican promises to take the most from the producers to give to the takers...rob peter to pay paul...the pauls are forever loyal to the politican who promises more...and the pauls multiply to out-vote the peters...

    once a democracy is in place the end game (fascism) is set...it is only a question of when not if...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by edweaver 5 years, 1 month ago
      You are correct that we say this in the pledge of allegiance but I would argue that does not make us a republic. The pledge itself was not written until 1892.

      What made us a Constitutional Republic was the way the founders set up the country. As someone else in this post suggests, reviewing the founding documents along with the Federalist & Anti-Federalist papers is required to understand the founders intent. Of course this has been squandered not only by amendments but also by our representatives setting it aside.

      I agree with the other thoughts of your post.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by brkssb 5 years, 1 month ago
    Seems to me that "Supreme Power" means or implies dictatorship, use of force, minority suffers at the hands of the majority, OLIGARCHY. One would believe that democracy is "majority rules by popular vote," and a republic is "majority rules by representative vote." The premise of both is that individual rights are subjugated to the majority opinion. Neither form has safeguards against tyranny; thus the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Powers enumerated to the three branches of government. Regretfully, these were insufficient to preclude Oligarchy or Dictatorship.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jetgraphics 5 years, 1 month ago
    REPUBLICAN FORM, UNIQUELY AMERICAN

    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

    America is unique among all nations on Earth, for only she has a republican form of government.

    Thanks to the efforts of the world's greatest propaganda ministry, her people have been programmed to never know it.

    It must be something astounding for them to take the time and effort to eradicate its memory.

    It is.
    • It is the reason why Americans do not bow nor kneel to other monarchs.
    • It is the reason why Americans can marry foreign nobility or monarchs without violating their local laws banning marriage to "commoners."
    • It is the reason why Americans could absolutely own land and even inflict capital punishment upon trespassers.
    • It is the reason why the vulgar taunt : "Kiss my royal American @ss" is technically and legally accurate.
    • It is the reason why no American can accept a title of nobility from a foreign monarch without losing his birthright.
    • It is the reason why Americans were once regarded with the highest esteem wherever they journeyed.
    • Even the lands she “conquered” raised their subject people from 'subjugation to a sovereign' to 'sovereign people.'

    {If you don’t think individual sovereignty is something astounding, then bow down and kiss the feet of those who claim dominion over you and yours. }

    Of course, this flies in the face of all we have been indoctrinated to believe. . . and frankly, I wouldn't have believed it without reading it in a county courthouse law library.

    When you dismiss this notion out of hand, just remember, you've given a mighty victory to your oppressors and enemies, who spent great fortunes and time to eradicate this from the public memory.

    I've seen direct evidence of DELIBERATE obfuscation to HIDE the facts and the truth from the American people.

    I might augment these sentiments with the observation that America became a "benevolent" totalitarian police state in 1933. That's when Americans embraced the notion that it was a "Good thing" for government to TAKE from one to GIVE to another.
    How else do you enforce such an abomination?
    Wheedle, "Pretty please, with sugar on top?"

    Regardless of what agency or branch you blame, it's still the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America... authorized by CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.
    (FICA / Social Security was, and is 100% voluntary. No law compels participation. No law punishes non-participants.)

    GAME PLAN

    If you've been paying attention, you may have noted the "strange" policies that appear to instigate conflict. Failure to deter illegal immigrants - bringing in Muslims who are at war with everyone - racking up great debt - debasing the money - and fomenting discord between people, old, young, rich, poor, light, dark, educated, ignorant, and geographically.

    Once "they" get you to fight a "civil war" then they can dispense with the niceties of consent, void the CONstitution, eradicate the Republican form of government, and repeal the Declaration of Independence. It is then a simple matter to institute a “sovereign” government to rule the “subject” people.

    American governments were not instituted for such a purpose. American governments were instituted by compact to secure the rights of the sovereign people. We were born to be Kings and Queens, monarchs of our lives and destinies. Americans were once the social equals of every other monarch on Earth - which explains why Americans didn’t bow or kneel to any other monarch. Any other “titled” nobleman was a step lower than the lowest American sovereign. Because of this birthright, our enemies have perverted generations, and polluted our language so that we may not recognize our tormentors. But I hope that someday, enough Americans awaken to their lost heritage. For when that day arrives, the heavens will rock with their exultation.

    "We.Are.Sovereign.Americans."

    And if we then prosper, we become an incentive to every other subject peoples to topple THEIR oppressors, and that is why America is scheduled for demolition.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ycandrea 5 years, 1 month ago
    Without looking it up, my understanding is that a democracy is unlimited mob rule, ie majority rule regardless of governing documents such as a constitution. And a Republic is majority rule within the guidelines of governing documents. In other words, no mob rule without limits. I might be wrong.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Riftsrunner 5 years, 1 month ago
    Your definitions are correct. A democracy is a government were all have a say in the governance of the State. It flaw is majority rule. As a great thinker (whose name escapes me) put it "A democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for dinner". The sheep is not long for this world in that democracy.

    A republic on the other hand is a form of governance where the voters vote on representatives to run the government and make the laws for them. It is supposed to blunt the majority rules problem of the democracy because it is possible for a minority of the total population could still get representation within the government. Think of it as giving the sheep a .45 in the above dinner discussion. It might still be dinner, but now it has a fighting chance.

    Our founding fathers also believed in state's rights, so they established a body (the senate) to represent the state's government's wishes within the Federal government. However, I believe many progressives saw this as an impediment to socializing the country and amended the Constitution to make Senators also elected by a majority of the population of their states instead of appointed by their state's legislatures or Governors. It is easier to blind a lot of out of touch voters than a group of legislators whose job is to make sure the laws are being written well.

    The United States was founded as a Constitutional Federal Democratic Republic. That means that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, our government is centralized and every citizen (who wants to) has a legal right to vote for whatever representative they feel represents them to go to Washington. This is a rather simplistic explaination, but it serves.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 1 month ago
      With that gone what are we now? Where did Democratic enter the picture? I fail to find it in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. the exception to it serving.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jabuttrick 5 years, 1 month ago
    I admit I have a very different set of definitions in mind when I use these terms. Democracy or Representative Democracy describes the manner by which decisions are made by the government. People elect representatives (or in a pure democracy vote directly) who make the governmental decisions. This is as opposed to other decision making mechanisms such as monarchy (where the King decides), aristocracy (where the aristocrats decide) or dictatorship (where the anointed "leader" decides). The notion of a Republic goes not go to the issue of who decides but, rather, to the scope of the power exercised by the decision making entity. I think of a Republic as a government whose powers are limited either by tradition or by a Constitution. Thus it is possible to have a Republic which is also a Representative Democracy. Am I the only one with this view of the matter?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 1 month ago
      Nice history lesson what's that got to do with reality? By your lights we are no longer a Constitutional Republic and most definitely not a representative democracy. What does that leave. I know not what others may think or do but as for me Seig Me No Heils I don't serve the party.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by jabuttrick 5 years, 1 month ago
        I think the United States in 2016 is a representative democracy, but the Republic has been lost because our "representatives" have failed to recognize the limitations on government power imposed by the Constitution and the Courts have failed to reign in those representatives.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jetgraphics 5 years ago
    REPUBLICAN FORM, UNIQUELY AMERICAN

    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

    America is unique among all nations on Earth, for only she has a republican form of government.

    Thanks to the efforts of the world's greatest propaganda ministry, her people have been programmed to never know it.

    It must be something astounding for them to take the time and effort to eradicate its memory.

    It is.
    • It is the reason why Americans do not bow nor kneel to other monarchs.
    • It is the reason why Americans can marry foreign nobility or monarchs without violating their local laws banning marriage to "commoners."
    • It is the reason why Americans could absolutely own land and even inflict capital punishment upon trespassers.
    • It is the reason why the vulgar taunt : "Kiss my royal American @ss" is technically and legally accurate.
    • It is the reason why no American can accept a title of nobility from a foreign monarch without losing his birthright.
    • It is the reason why Americans were once regarded with the highest esteem wherever they journeyed.
    • Even the lands she “conquered” raised their subject people from 'subjugation to a sovereign' to 'sovereign people.'

    {If you don’t think individual sovereignty is something astounding, then bow down and kiss the feet of those who claim dominion over you and yours. }

    Of course, this flies in the face of all we have been indoctrinated to believe. . . and frankly, I wouldn't have believed it without reading it in a county courthouse law library.

    When you dismiss this notion out of hand, just remember, you've given a mighty victory to your oppressors and enemies, who spent great fortunes and time to eradicate this from the public memory.

    I've seen direct evidence of DELIBERATE obfuscation to HIDE the facts and the truth from the American people.

    I might augment these sentiments with the observation that America became a "benevolent" totalitarian police state in 1933. That's when Americans embraced the notion that it was a "Good thing" for government to TAKE from one to GIVE to another.
    How else do you enforce such an abomination?
    Wheedle, "Pretty please, with sugar on top?"

    Regardless of what agency or branch you blame, it's still the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America... authorized by CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.
    (FICA / Social Security was, and is 100% voluntary. No law compels participation. No law punishes non-participants.)

    GAME PLAN

    If you've been paying attention, you may have noted the "strange" policies that appear to instigate conflict. Failure to deter illegal immigrants - bringing in Muslims who are at war with everyone - racking up great debt - debasing the money - and fomenting discord between people, old, young, rich, poor, light, dark, educated, ignorant, and geographically.

    Once "they" get you to fight a "civil war" then they can dispense with the niceties of consent, void the CONstitution, eradicate the Republican form of government, and repeal the Declaration of Independence. It is then a simple matter to institute a “sovereign” government to rule the “subject” people.

    American governments were not instituted for such a purpose. American governments were instituted by compact to secure the rights of the sovereign people. We were born to be Kings and Queens, monarchs of our lives and destinies. Americans were once the social equals of every other monarch on Earth - which explains why Americans didn’t bow or kneel to any other monarch. Any other “titled” nobleman was a step lower than the lowest American sovereign. Because of this birthright, our enemies have perverted generations, and polluted our language so that we may not recognize our tormentors. But I hope that someday, enough Americans awaken to their lost heritage. For when that day arrives, the heavens will rock with their exultation.

    "We.Are.Sovereign.Americans."

    And if we then prosper, we become an incentive to every other subject peoples to topple THEIR oppressors, and that is why America is scheduled for demolition.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 1 month ago
    The error is confusing democratic in any of it's form with independence. The D words invariably lead to socialism which invariably fails.

    Delegated elected by independent and independently voting citizens exercising their rights and responsibilities does not require a political party only an honest portrayal of the choices and two other items. None Of The Above and Recall. Disarming the citizens as do the D word people does not fit the question posed. It fits the reason the framers and founders gave it no space.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jdg 5 years, 1 month ago
    "Representative democracy" is just a euphemism for republic -- one mostly intended to placate those who think we ought to be a democracy.

    They might want to check out the towns in New England that still have the "town meeting" form of government. That's democracy, at least at the local level. And at the local level it can sometimes work.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 1 month ago
    I think democracy is just mob rule, replacing the edicts of a dictator with edicts of the 50.1% majority. Republic has fixed rules not subject to whims of the majority. We have mob rule now. Majority does whatever it wants. All bets are off
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 1 month ago
    Xenok I think what we're finding out is the framing and reframing, defining and redefining, opinions based not on facts in evidence has produced much the same level of answersand as usual too many at odds with each other. - to produce much of immediate value to objectivist standards.

    KISS applied the short definition remains Democracy equals direct control by citizens. Republic form equals indirect control through delegates selected by citizens - as it pertains to the situation we are in. the follow on is 'under control of and only with the limited powers granted, No more complicated than that. Strip away the righteous and the debaters those who roll up their sleeves and accomplish something are still a distinct minority. You notice each of the latter identified the problem and offered a potential solution. I'll leave you to it I have other fish to fry for the moment and am on a self imposed hiatus.

    Three focal points are what if anything can be done from the inside with Cruz and Rubio minus Trump

    I see no recruiting potential on the outside they are not sufficiently coalesced nor pledged to anything in particular as a focal point being more interested in talking than walking.

    Failing that what if anything can be done asking the military to up hold their oath of office.

    Failing that.....learn German, learn Chinese or learn Marksmanship to paraphrase the old Russian saying. That 'k' might have been an 'x'

    Staff feel free to bounce me for whatever period ...I have a book on epistemology to read.

    However one of your best effort yet. Kudos!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 5 years, 1 month ago
    " power rests in the body of "Citizens "Entitled" to Vote"...that's the difference; [besides individual sovereignty over one's rights, property or contract] , Clearly only those, invested in the country as it is usually expressed...meaning, owning something like property or a business...I don't know for sure but I would assume that they paid some sort of local taxes and were involved in Ruling themselves as in their communities and State...(not necessarily a requirement but was more the case than the rule). I also could not verify if someone whom participated in self governance (town, city or state) but did not own property and or had no income source was allowed to vote. Couldn't find any examples...might be interesting research.

    Of course we understand "democracy" as Anyone can vote no matter if one is invested or not, pays local taxes or not, is legal or not...alive or dead. And must we not forget...only the squeaky wheel gets greased or rather those that don't squeak pay for the grease...And...your rights are delegated to you by government and the squeaky wheel! (sarcasm for laughs) This is the present state of our government.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 1 month ago
    The way you give double credit is to do a comment like this, make no comment and dedicate the thumbs up or down to the original comment poster.

    So once you've given him one thumbs up, that's Herb and the thread founder at the very top the same. This space is for double or triple credit.... Don't make me say it again.

    Staff of Galt's Gulch any thumbs up in this comment accrue to Xenok and Ralph.

    This one's for you!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 1 month ago
    This whole thread is amazing and it only took me a bit less than a year to convince people who ought to have known better.

    So what's it going to be at this late juncture?

    Cruz and Rubio quit duking each other join forces and do an in house counter revolution.

    The Military upholds it's oath of office as a legal counter revolution

    Blood in the streets.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo