Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

homestead - Re: [Homestead] The Constitution

homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Homestead mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Gene GeRue <genegerue AT ruralize.com>
  • To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Homestead] The Constitution
  • Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 18:11:10 -0700


How can we take anyone seriously when they refer to the U.S. as a
democracy. It is a republic . . . .

> Why New Rules?
> Because the old ones don't work any longer. They undermine local
economies, subvert democracy, . . .

You are knee-jerking and not reading carefully. "They" speak of old rules that subvert democracy; they do not say America is a democracy.

But now that you mention it, I find the insistence on the distinction to be tedious. What useful purpose does it serve? The USA fits both definitions. Here is the Webster definition of "democracy":

1 a government by the people: esp. : rule of the majority b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usu. involving periodically held free elections."

Sounds pretty much like the USA to me.

Here is the definition of "republic":

a (1): a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usu. a president (2) a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government b (1): a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2) a a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government c : a usu. specified republican government of a political unit, the French Fourth Republic> . . . .

Again, sounds pretty much like the USA to me.

What is the point of beating on a distinction?






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page