The United States is NOT a democracy and never was
- Thread starter Al-O-Meter
- Start date
Red
Well-Known Member
Yes, I know, sorry, I should have specified that, just thought it was a clever and succinct way to put it.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
It is neither clever or succinct. There is a reason ancient Rome, with its emperors and where we get the term 'republic' from, is not considered a type of democracy. A republic is not a type of democracy but rather a distinct form of government. That article was written to make people dumber and to reaffirm their preheld wrong beliefs.
A constitutional republic isn't about minority rule. A constitutional republic is about constitutional rule. The argument that the United States is a democracy is a dishonest talking point being pushed by those who find the constitution to be a hindrance and want to tear down its structural checks on power. Long live the Constitution and down with ignorance!
The Romans didn't vote for their representatives. So yeah, there was no democratic institution in place in their republic.
There is in ours. And we've been over that already.
One Brow
Well-Known Member
Who would that group be, how large are they, and what structural checks on power do you think they want to eliminate?
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
The line used in the article is “A collie is a dog, not an animal.” All collies are dogs and all dogs are animals therefor all collies are animals with analogy trying to make the case that all United States of Americas are republics and all republics are democracies therefor the United States is a democracy. You are bright enough to see that ancient Rome was a republic and is not considered a democracy which makes that analogy not true to this situation. Other people not a bright as you don't see that and think it clever and succinct rather than purposely designed to misinform.
Red
Well-Known Member
As I mentioned to you in an earlier reply, whether this thread, or another, not sure, but I told you that I know when I participate in democracy in America. In fact, I’ve done so many times, and will likely do so again in November of 2022. So, I suggest you take your bs and blow it out your arse….
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
So your problem is with the analogy?
OK...
The United States has democratic processes all the way up to electing our federal representatives and our President. Before you go there, I understand that the electoral college is a check on democracy and we do not directly elect our President.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
I agree 100% with everything you wrote here.
So we aren't a republic either, since a republic by definition is a representative government and it is easily shown the government does not represent the people. We are a business, with emphasis on providing the elected officials a hefty salary and premier bonuses and perks. The service they are selling is influence in the government to provide an advantage to other businesses and organizations. It is almost like the most powerful consulting firm on the planet. The price varies wildly, but there is always a price. It is run on a bid basis, and the influence generally goes to the highest bidder. Unfortunately all "we the people" can offer is the standard salary of $174,000 per year, which cannot compete with millions for campaign funds and other perks directly or indirectly "paid" to the legislators. Since we are the low bidders we only get what we want or approve of 30% of the time, you know, on the stuff that doesn't have a huge influence on some monster corporation or industry or doesn't interest some mega-billionaire. The other 70%, you know the important stuff that has a real influence on us all, there are higher bidders in place that take precedent. So we should stop pretending we have an actual government and accept that we are run by the Influence Brokers of The United States of America.
I have always held the position that until we get rid of lobbying and crack down on this kind of legal bribery we will never get ahead in the areas that matter most, like healthcare for everyone.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
As I have been trying to tell you for this entire thread, that is NOT THE DEFINITION OF A REPUBLIC. Teachers like The Thriller have ruined everyone's brain by conflating 'republic' with 'representative democracy'. What the Princeton study found was statistical proof that we do not act like a representative democracy to which political science says "duh". The difference between a republic and a representative democracy is that in the former there is something or many somethings more important than popular support. That Princeton study concluded that something or many somethings are more important than public support in how the US government functions.
I'm happy you found your own evidence to support what I have been saying all along. We aren't a representative democracy. We are a republic that democratically elects some office holders. We are a democratic republic.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
You should just leave it here:
Dictionaries now routinely correct definitions to encompass popular idiocy. A quick way for you to fact check your definitions is to ask yourself if North Korea would be included in that definition as North Korea is a republic. It is a sad reality that the 2+2=5 crowd has gained so much power and now we can't agree on what a woman is, or what violence is, or what constitutes a riot, and now they're going to work on what a recession is. If you took political science more than a decade ago, that is not the definition for republic you will find in your text.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
The popular fashion to redefine terms to make it fit the result you want is a thing that doesn't sit well with me at all. It has been around for a while but really gained traction around 2016 with the push to redefine racism as power + prejudice so that racist AF hustlers who happen to be ethnic minorities can't be labeled as racist. The popular thing was to dismiss dictionaries and say "sociologists define racism as...". It wasn't true and if you have a sociology text from before 2015 they define racism as prejudice against an ethnic group. Almost overnight all the sociology texts were rewritten to encompass the new P+P=R definition. It worked so well that now the tactic is used for everything including what constitutes a recession and what constitutes a republic.
You should just leave it here:
Dictionaries now routinely correct definitions to encompass popular idiocy. A quick way for you to fact check your definitions is to ask yourself if North Korea would be included in that definition as North Korea is a republic. It is a sad reality that the 2+2=5 crowd has gained so much power and now we can't agree on what a woman is, or what violence is, or what constitutes a riot, and now they're going to work on what a recession is. If you took political science more than a decade ago, that is not the definition for republic you will find in your text.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
You should just leave it here:
Dictionaries now routinely correct definitions to encompass popular idiocy. A quick way for you to fact check your definitions is to ask yourself if North Korea would be included in that definition as North Korea is a republic. It is a sad reality that the 2+2=5 crowd has gained so much power and now we can't agree on what a woman is, or what violence is, or what constitutes a riot, and now they're going to work on what a recession is. If you took political science more than a decade ago, that is not the definition for republic you will find in your text.
Make america dictionaryless again! Freaking dictionaries always defining stuff differently than Al thinks they should.
Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app