It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Phage
Refine. Not redefine.
To reiterate: democracy is a broad term. A republic is a type of democracy.
There can be a true democracy which is not a republic. There can't be a true republic which is not a democracy.
Montesquieu included both democracies, where all the people have a share in rule, and aristocracies or oligarchies, where only some of the people rule, as republican forms of government.
Another refining of the general terminology. Not sure capitalizing liberal is appropriate though.
Phage
reply to post by caterpillage
Heinlein's version:
A democracy is based on the notion that a million are smarter than one.
The converse being:
A dictatorship is based on the notion that one is smarter than a million.
The entry for republic in wiki states that:
As he defines them, Republican political systems vary depending on how broadly they extend citizenship rights—those that extend citizenship relatively broadly are termed democratic republics, while those that restrict citizenship more narrowly are termed aristocratic republics.
Meaning that democracy is a broad term.
Well it is a term from the 18th century so I don't know what you mean by refining of the general terminology
Phage
Meaning that democracy is a broad term.
Phage
A republic, which is a representative democracy, is better. It provides a voice to those in the minority.edit on
Phage, usually you're bang on, but whenever this topic crops up on ATS there seems to be some major cognitive dissonance about what the terms "democracy" and "republic" actually mean and it would seem you have fallen into the same trap.
A Democracy is merely where the people (whoever that is defined to be) are allowed to vote, either on electing representatives to enact laws on their behalf or in a direct system such as Switzerland.
A Republic is simply a form of Government which does not have a hereditary Monarch. That is it's definition, nothing more, nothing less.
The two terms are not mutually exclusive and in fact describe totally different things.
A Republic doesn't have to be democratic - see North Korea.
Likewise, a Democracy doesn't have to be a Republic - see the UK.
You can have a democratic republic, like the US (or France, or Germany...take your pick). Being a Republic doesn't come with some pre-defined form of Government, again see the examples I mentioned all of which have radically different forms of Government.
It would appear that some on ATS seem to think that the terms are not mutually compatible, but this seems to stem from a misunderstanding about what the words mean. It certainly appears that like most other things in the world, what it means in the US is entirely different than what it means everywhere else in the World.
When strictly talking about the type of Government, not it's behaviour, the US is a Constitutional Federal Republic - it is however also a democracy in that it allows it's citizens to vote. extra DIV
Phage
reply to post by Cuervo
Somewhat. But that representation gets broken down into smaller and smaller units so it's not "all" the decisions being made by the same handful.
Got a more workable system in mind? A better one?
onequestion
reply to post by AfterInfinity
A direct democracy is a majority rule system rather then a system based on protecting individual rights.
We want power in the individual and civil liberty NOT the majority rule.
AfterInfinity
I still don't get it. My understanding is that a republic gives power to its citizens and representatives, and a democracy gives power to its citizens through representatives. The difference is lost on me.