The United States is a Republic not a democracy

reply to post by robwerden


Yes, yes, the United States is a Republic. I think everybody knows that.
If they don't maybe they are still in middle school.

Now please, just calm down.

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by robwerden

 

Well I have asked several questions that you have been unable to answer. What, in the current state of the United States, is our overall form of government?

The current state of the USA is a REPUBLIC!!!
The people are other

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by robwerden

 

Well I have asked several questions that you have been unable to answer. What, in the current state of the United States, is our overall form of government?

Allow me to attempt to answer your question. The current state of the United States government is one rooted in a very strong federal government that has bribed the states to abdicate their own soverignty in favor of federal funds, thereby weakening the power of the states, who have colluded with the federal government to further weaken the inherent political power that belongs to the people, namely through income taxation.

The states and local governments have created dubious licensing schemes, blatantly interferring with the right to contract, demanding that people not only obtain a license to drive, but a license to do business. However, in order to obtain a license to do business, no license will be granted until those applying for one first obtain a federal tax I.D. number that instantly makes them liable for a tax and therefore subject to the income tax laws.

This collusion between the several states and federal government doesn't stop there as the three branches created the the Constitution and granted a powers distinctly separate from each other, was intended to act as a sort of check on each branch, in the hopes that each branch of the federal government would zealously and jealously guard their own power and act to minimize the power of the other two branches. However, what has happened instead, is a alleigiance between the three branches where each work in concert with the other to strengthen the chains of federalism.

Where Congress is the only branch that has the authority to declare war, they have not done so since World War II, even though the U.S. has engaged in several military adventures that would, for all intents and purposes, constitute, war. The President has found ways to legislate through executive orders, and SCOTUS as well, attempts to function as a legislative branch in effect "making law", rather than interpreting it.

These brief examples of collusion are just the tip of the iceberg, and the real problem lies with the apathy of the people who have mindlessly allowed both federal and state governments to act the way they do. What form of government do have, then? We have a tyrannical government that in many ways surpasses the madness of King George back in 1776.

The US is both a Republic and a Democracy ...


All of you "Founding Fathers" lovers should know this ..

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Wow! The world changes huh?
Gee, lets go back to the original Constitution shall we?
Limit voting to white land owners!
Lets let the legislatures appoint Senators!
The founders were certainly the rich elites of their day, I guess then, they intended rule by elites! Lets go for that.
The American Revultion was change. governments and society changes over time, I think the founders were smart enough to get that don't you?
So....WTF do you people wany anyway? What changes do you want?
Not Bs about "the people' Which people?

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Wow! The world changes huh?
Gee, lets go back to the original Constitution shall we?
Limit voting to white land owners!
Lets let the legislatures appoint Senators!
The founders were certainly the rich elites of their day, I guess then, they intended rule by elites! Lets go for that.
The American Revultion was change. governments and society changes over time, I think the founders were smart enough to get that don't you?
So....WTF do you people wany anyway? What changes do you want?
Not Bs about "the people' Which people?

There you go again with fallacious arguments relying upon ad hominems and straw man arguments in a hopeless attempt to deflect from the reality that Constitutionally speaking the U.S. is not a democracy. I have conceded in an earlier post in this thread that it has moved ever closer to that democracy you so desperately want it to be by usurpation, but legally speaking, refering to the Supreme Law of the Land, the U.S. is a republic.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]

This is a stupid thread IMO. Only the most ignorant person think that the US is a direct democracy (places like ancient Greece for example..) but in order to use a system such as that there needs to be a relatively small, educated society; we are neither of those things apparently.

also a very used topic for a mini-rant. Oh well.

reply to post by Polynomial C


....within a framework of a Federal system.

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by robwerden

 

Stop the ridiculous nitpicking about democracy! The president and Congress are elected by a democratic process known as voting AS CONTAINED IN THE US CONSTITUTION!!!

I have read a lot of your responses, OldDragger, and would like to ask, where do you come from? Politicians and presidents ARE NOT elected by the people. Maybe you "think" they are but they are not. The President is elected by the electoral college and politicians/representatives are elected by the state legislators. You need to read the Constitution again, you missed a few things.

I urge everyon here, and some have, to watch "The Hidden Empire". Found at;

1984news.com...

It will give you something to think about. The united States of America is actually a federation, a republic type government and democracy is what "changes" the rules. It is a federation of States, hence these united States of America. We are Natural persons and not artificial "persons", therefore ANY law that Congress passes does nto apply to you or I. As we are not, again, a person, which is a corporation in a legal sense. We are not engaged in commerce so we need no licenses.

I wish more people would read Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine, two of the greatest writers ever.

The English Parliament of 1688 did a certain thing, which, for themselves and their constituents, they had a right to do, and which it appeared right should be done. But, in addition to this right, which they possessed by delegation, they set up another right by assumption, that of binding and controlling posterity to the end of time. The case, therefore, divides itself into two parts; the right which they possessed by delegation, and the right which they set up by assumption. The first is admitted; but with respect to the second, I reply-

There never did, there never will, and there never can, exist a Parliament, or any description of men, or any generation of men, in any country, possessed of the right or the power of binding and controlling posterity to the "end of time," or of commanding for ever how the world shall be governed, or who shall govern it; and therefore all such clauses, acts or declarations by which the makers of them attempt to do what they have neither the right nor the power to do, nor the power to execute, are in themselves null and void. Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself in all cases as the age and generations which preceded it. The vanity and presumption of governing beyond the grave is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies. Man has no property in man; neither has any generation a property in the generations which are to follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of any other period, had no more right to dispose of the people of the present day, or to bind or to control them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind or control those who are to live a hundred or a thousand years hence. Every generation is, and must be, competent to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is the living, and not the dead, that are to be accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power and his wants cease with him; and having no longer any participation in the concerns of this world, he has no longer any authority in directing who shall be its governors, or how its government shall be organised, or how administered.

Thomas Paine

[edit on 25-12-2009 by daddio]

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

Wow! The world changes huh?

Gee, lets go back to the original Constitution shall we?
Limit voting to white land owners!
Lets let the legislatures appoint Senators!
The founders were certainly the rich elites of their day, I guess then, they intended rule by elites! Lets go for that.
The American Revultion was change. governments and society changes over time, I think the founders were smart enough to get that don't you?
So....WTF do you people wany anyway? What changes do you want?
Not Bs about "the people' Which people?

And just so you know, the American Revolutionary war meant nothing, it did nothing. That is an actual fact. And the state legislators still elect the representatives. And yes, the government is still run by the elite as it is a private corporation and the U.S. is distinctly different from the U.S.A. Better get that right too. And yes the Constitution is a corporate document and does NOT apply to the Citizens, the Bill of Rights DOES apply to the Citizens, get that right too.

Dang you guys.

I was writing a history lesson what our government was, has been and now is.

Ahhhh, maybe I will just toss it or bring up something else.

It seemed the lesson needed to be taught.

OP, you made a couple of minor mistakes.

Otherwise your whole description is close.

Representative Democracy vs. Representative Republic

The Republic being a form of government with the basic framework of what is allowed to be handled by the State and the rights and responsibilities required of it's sovereign citizens.

We are far from it now, just on the basis of the ignorance of the very sovereign citizens represented here on this site.

We no longer have that form of government. More a mishmash of Oligarchy, Fascist Corporatism, Monarchy, and a couple of other tyrannical measures thrown in-including Democracy in that tyranny statement.

reply to post by robwerden


A republic is a representative democracy there, George Washington. Therefore, it's a form of democracy. It's not a pure democracy, but a form of democracy, nonetheless. So you're wrong.

Originally posted by endisnighe
Dang you guys.

We no longer have that form of government. More a mishmash of Oligarchy, Fascist Corporatism, Monarchy, and a couple of other tyrannical measures thrown in-including Democracy in that tyranny statement.

Ahhhh............so you were going to write about your opinions.

Democracy, Republic?

When Senator Ben Nelson (D. Neb) dealt with democrats for Nelson's critical 60th vote to get the health care bill passed in exchange (bribery, not constitutional) Senator Harry Reid agreed that the fed government would pay 100 percent for the planned Medicaid expansion in Nebraska forever.

Question is, do you think of this as democratic or republic?
Do the citizens have a voice in these Senators' dealings that could be considered criminal? (paying for a vote to pass a law).

Is that the American way, to pay off and sell out or to work for the greater good without temptations of certain prizes, benefits to sway your vote? In college athletics, it is illegal to give gifts to future recruited athletes to sway their decision of their choice to where they attend college; So why is it legal for the LAWMAKERS that guard/make these laws to punish those athletes in college, yet, when the laws against gifts (bribery) that sway decisions are used by the LAWMAKERS, the LAW doesn't harshly punish it?

[edit on 26-12-2009 by problemsolvr]

The United States is a Corportacracy, it is not currently a democracy.

I don't understand why you Americans get up in arms about these two words. They don't even mean the same thing. It's like saying "it's and orange, not and apple"...

A Republic is a form of Government where the Head of State isn't a hereditary Monarch, for example. That is it.

The word Republic or Republican has nothing to do with the how a country is run. You can have a Republican Dictatorship, like the USSR or you could have a Democratic republic, like France.

A democracy is a form of Government where the people "choose" the their leaders, irregardless of the how whether it be by a direct vote or by some sort of electoral college.

Honestly, arguing over wether a country is a Republic or a Democracy is like a man arguing with a woman over who has the biggest penis. All you're doing is displaying a shockingly low level of understanding about what the words mean.

[edit on 26/12/09 by stumason]

reply to post by ladyinwaiting


And another one bites the ignore list.

Thanks to your writer skills, we are so enlightened now.

Have fun in your metaphorical world.

Originally posted by stumason
I don't understand why you Americans get up in arms about these two words. They don't even mean the same thing. It's like saying "it's and orange, not and apple"...

A Republic is a form of Government where the Head of State isn't a hereditary Monarch, for example. That is it.

The word Republic or Republican has nothing to do with the how a country is run. You can have a Republican Dictatorship, like the USSR or you could have a Democratic republic, like France.

A democracy is a form of Government where the people "choose" the their leaders, irregardless of the how whether it be by a direct vote or by some sort of electoral college.

Honestly, arguing over wether a country is a Republic or a Democracy is like a man arguing with a woman over who has the biggest penis. All you're doing is displaying a shockingly low level of understanding about what the words mean.

[edit on 26/12/09 by stumason]

The reason it means so much to people in the United States is because they actually have a profound respect for inalienable rights, at least a good portion of people in the U.S. do, and there are too many people who embrace a democracy declaring that a majority rule is the rule of law. People know that majorities are inclined to do stupid things like vote away their rights under the Constitutional republic that was formed the people can't just vote away their rights regardless of how big that majority is.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Ah but the mere mention of collusion implies that the States willingly have entered into a dubious contract with the Federal Government to do harm to the lowest denominator, the people.

Would said government ever breach such a common law principle?

In the words of an inebriated human being.....which by the way is asinine......In the original form, government was to be conducted at the lowest form possible, with limited and constricted powers towards the greater (Federal Government). Slowly, the Feds have realized that more power to the State, which in turn provides power to the the People, erodes the central power of the Federal Government.

In the purest sense, what the Founding Fathers wished upon, and fought for, is near perfect in terms of a State. Power is derived from the People and held at the lowest point possible. People in power have realized this and have been hard at work, burning the midnight oil so to speak, consolidating power to the highest level.

The people are none the wiser because they have food on their table, a job and television (the greatest invention since the Gladiators and the Colosseum....)