Is the US a true republic/democracy?

[Squilly]

Originally Posted by elistan

Ask three different people to define "democracy" and "republic" and you'll get six different answers. Ask three different experts or scholars and you'll probably get similar variation.

But communist (which, by the way, is an economic system, not political) or dictatorship? Umm, no.

The OP seems to use those terms to mean they're synonymous with "a system of laws I don't like." Just wait until he lives in a true democracy where everybody gets together and votes to throw him in a Gulag.

Was thinking more about this while driving. Ex. Gay marriage. Why should a government stop something you want that doesn't inflict on another entity? I find it ****ed up for one and unlike a democracy.

[Teh Don Ditty]

I remember my first Poly Sci class

[elistan]

Originally Posted by Squilly

Was thinking more about this while driving. Ex. Gay marriage. Why should a government stop something you want that doesn't inflict on another entity? I find it ****ed up for one and unlike a democracy.

But it's exactly like a democracy. A group gets together and the majority votes "we want to supress such-and-such minority." Simple as that.

A democracy does not imply freedom. You don't need a communist economic model or a dictatorship to limit freedoms. See Tyranny_of_the_majority

The "dont limit anything that doesn't impact other people" concept is most often ascribed to libertarianism rather than democracy.

[VulchR]

Oops. Misunderstood a post above and responded on that basis. nothing to see here. Move along.

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by dukebound85

I would argue your premise is wrong. We elect officials largely on where they stand on issues. We do not dictate how they vote nor require that they bend to the will of the population once in office. They are accountable to the voters and if the voters do not approve of their representative's actions, they elect someone else next term.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by dukebound85

The very fact we elect officials makes the OP's comparison to a dictatorship/communist state absurd.

And agreed.

Well said on both counts.

----------

Originally Posted by Technarchy

First step would be to never vote for an incumbent. They all need to go.

Vote for the most qualified candidate.

Whether they are an incumbent or not.

[rdowns]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Vote for the most qualified candidate.

Whether they are an incumbent or not.

The problem there is that incumbents have the power of the office and it's much easier to raise money. Career politicians created the problems we have today and we are under the illusion that these same idiots can solve the problems. Look at the pic below of Senators over age 70 and how long they've been there. Crazy.

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by rdowns

The problem there is that incumbents have the power of the office and it's much easier to raise money.

Yes. I understand that.

I am not going, however, fall for the overly simplistic solution of voting incumbents out of office.

[rdowns]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Yes. I understand that.

I am not going, however, fall for the overly simplistic solution of voting incumbents out of office.

Nor am I advocating such a ridiculous idea. Just pointing out that incumbency is a problem.

[Technarchy]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Vote for the most qualified candidate.

Whether they are an incumbent or not.

Qualified? Is that a joke? Do you see what passes for represenation.

I'd rather reset the political clock to zero by ousting all incumbants and taking my chances with someone who isn't entrenched with corporations, banking cartels and special interest groups.

[JohnLT13]

Originally Posted by Technarchy

Oligarchs and plutocrats run this joint. It can only be a real republic if more people choose to be informed voters.

First step would be to never vote for an incumbent. They all need to go.

I agree with you for the most part, But if incumbents were not revoted in I feel we would just have a leadership thats constantly working on past mistakes without moving forward. I do however highly favor term limits.

[Technarchy]

Originally Posted by JohnLT13

I agree with you for the most part, But if incumbents were not revoted in I feel we would just have a leadership thats constantly working on past mistakes without moving forward. I do however highly favor term limits.

After cleaning house we fix the next issue, which Warren Buffett speaks on well:

"I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told Becky Quick. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election."

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by Technarchy

Qualified? Is that a joke? Do you see what passes for represenation.

You're right.

The Republicans are making a joke out of the House and Senate.

Good call Tech.

[Technarchy]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

You're right.

The Republicans are making a joke out of the House and Senate.

Good call Tech.

Please. That type partisan party thinking is for children.

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by Technarchy

Please. That type partisan party thinking is for children.

Right.

While ... you ... are ... an ... independent ... who ... considers ... both ... sides.

Spare me.

[ucfgrad93]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Right.

While ... you ... are ... an ... independent ... who ... considers ... both ... sides.

Spare me.

And you are any better?

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by ucfgrad93

And you are any better?

Never claimed I wasn't partisan.

You want clarity?

I am a left-wing, democratic socialist.

I don't pretend otherwise.

[mobilehaathi]

Originally Posted by Squilly

Forget that. We elect officials. Who says they follow through? Happens on every presidential election. Never follows through on everything they say. Yeah, we can get them demoted from office but it's unlikely.

Squillz buddy, if engineering doesn't work out for you, perhaps you could major in Political Science.

[PowerPCMacMan]

is a Plutocracy.. Its no longer a Republic. Its an evil corporate empire run by corporations. The only things I would like to see end in this country is corporate rule, the razing of the FEDERAL RESERVE and its leaders hung, and also the end of the IRS.

Ron Paul 2016!

Let the REVOLUTION begin!

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Originally Posted by dukebound85

We are not a democracy
We are not a communist state
We are not a dictatorship

We are a representative republic

Do you even know what the forms of government you list are and what they entail? If you did, you wouldn't have created this thread to put it simply.

Additionally, you really think we can have organized, ordinary society with no government? Have you not seen what happens in the face of natural disasters where the government is in disarray here? It is anything but organized. It is chaos. Looting and unlawfulness becomes the norm.

What makes the U.S. a "real" republic is that we can still vote people out of office, unlike, for example, Russia. (But, the fact that they pretend to be able to vote people out may help in the future.) I have been to a few countries that made no pretense (at the time) of being a real republic. You can sense the difference the second you go through customs.

[As an aside, I'm not sure pure democracy works any time you have more than Dunbar's Number of people.]

[skunk]

Originally Posted by elistan

But it's exactly like a democracy. A group gets together and the majority votes "we want to supress such-and-such minority." Simple as that.

A democracy does not imply freedom. You don't need a communist economic model or a dictatorship to limit freedoms. See Tyranny_of_the_majority

The "dont limit anything that doesn't impact other people" concept is most often ascribed to libertarianism rather than democracy.

This is misrepresenting democracy. Democracy is entirely compatible with constitutional government.

[elistan]

Originally Posted by skunk

This is misrepresenting democracy. Democracy is entirely compatible with constitutional government.

Sure, I definitely agree. It doesn't require a constitutional government, either, though.