67

To take a stab at it, I agree the terms are complementary, not opposite, or exclusionary, and I also agree a monarchy can be a republic as well.

Short and sweet…a Republic is where state power is limited by a charter or constitution. Individual rights are (usually) protected from the “tyranny of the majority” (or other power center) in such a system.

Democracy can be a broader term under which a republic can fit, but it can also be a system where the power is in the hands of the people without any limits or protections.

So a pure democracy…like the Athenian form (kinda) was…can have individual rights suborned to the power of the majority.

68

Fairly simple where the US and it Constitution are concerned, less so elsewhere: an republic is a democracy but only where there is an enumerated power to do something … all other possible powers are reserved to the States and the people. There is only one way for the federal government to be delegated new power: the amendment process. In that respect the Constitution is precisely an enabling law.

So only with respect to enumerated powers and nothing else. It is the chief obligation of the federal to obey the Law and not to take care of the people.

It doesn’t matter if the lawlessness is long established or popular, with no lawful ability it is lawlessness. There has never been a vote on the program, never the great debates, and government imposes put near everything just because.

A “democracy” by contrast is rule by whatever or whoever can get or invent the most votes and nothing it does is ultimately illegal, even running rough shod over “enumerated rights”.

In a republic like our the government is to bound by heavy chains and the people are free.

In a democracy like we lawlessly endure the ultimate reality is the government is free and the people are shackled however it feels.

1 Like
69
  1. Citizens vote for laws directly.
  2. Appointed leaders govern the citizenry.
  3. Direct democracy governs directly, haphazardly whichever way the wind blows. Republic governs by what is deemed best for the populace by our “betters.”

In a democratic republic, we have the option to tell them they’re not our betters.

70

Depends on how much money and power one has. Money has a louder voice in our democratic republic

71

Utter and complete nonsense.

1 Like
72

Not bad. No, they are not opposite. Neither is about how ruling class is chosen.

The difference is in who decides and who owns the rights.

In a republic, nobody, majority or anybody else, gets on a vote on somebody else’s rights.

2 Likes
73

That is very well said. Although I would argue the government is not currently being executed as a republic. As promised.

2 Likes
74

Sorry. Incorrect. That is the centgov explanation.

75

Louder voice is not synonymous with more power.

76

Well, I indicated that in the sentence following.

77

Example:

Is the right to keep and bear arms being collectively violated without due process (individual always) in New Jersey today as we speak?

78

It’s the other way around.

79

Sort of and I get it.

80

No it’s not.

81

Sure, but we don’t have a pure republic.

82

The obessession with how the ruling class is chosen is fascinating. Wouldn’t it better to focus on not letting anyone violate our rights, no matter how they are chosen?

3 Likes
83

How is that relevant? Is the right being violated, yes or no?

84

Do you have an example where having more power doesn’t lead to having a larger voice (influence)?

85

It’s relevant because in our mix… the majority can make laws that may limit/diminish some constitutional rights. We have the judicial to review those laws

86

Yes.
…