Difference between US and a true Democracy

[storealex]

I wonder if we have any Political Science Majors posting in this forum so that they can tell us .

Well Im just saying what my political science teacher told me back in high school. And she had a major.

 

[Tomoyo]

Anyway, I concider Athens the only "True Democracy" which has ever existed. In that all the citizens were able and I believe even required to vote and hold office at some point in their lives. However, I will not deny that the requirements for citizenship were unfair and descriminatory. But it was a different time with different standards.

IIRC there are some directly democratic villages in Switzerland...

 

[blackheart]

The US is a collection of smaller democratic states that combine to form a government that largely represents the majority of the population.

By that definition its commune like!

 

[Sims2789]

Although the US is not a democracy, it is important to remember that the politicians help the corporations only enough to gain their support, unless, of course, the politicians and the corporates are the same people. It is the same concept with how they give concessions toi different groups like the religious fanatics, but only enough concessions to gain their support.

NOTE: Do not say, "the US isn't a democracy; it's a federal republic. By democracy I mean any type of democratic government, and you know it.

 

[Zarn]

Although the US is not a democracy, it is important to remember that the politicians help the corporations only enough to gain their support, unless, of course, the politicians and the corporates are the same people. It is the same concept with how they give concessions toi different groups like the religious fanatics, but only enough concessions to gain their support.

NOTE: Do not say, "the US isn't a democracy; it's a federal republic. By democracy I mean any type of democratic government, and you know it.

We aren't democratic either.

Sims bites another propaganda bullet. If only you would listen, instead of shruging me aside would you realize what I am actually saying.

Democratic government and Democracy... I don't see them being two different things.

 

[searcheagle]

Although the US is not a democracy, it is important to remember that the politicians help the corporations only enough to gain their support, unless, of course, the politicians and the corporates are the same people. It is the same concept with how they give concessions toi different groups like the religious fanatics, but only enough concessions to gain their support.

NOTE: Do not say, "the US isn't a democracy; it's a federal republic. By democracy I mean any type of democratic government, and you know it.

YOu are completely missing the point this poster's question. Which is a legitimate question of what the distinction is between a republic and a democracy. Why don't you open another thread to talk about your corporate conspiracy theories some places.

 

[Akka]

YOu are completely missing the point this poster's question. Which is a legitimate question of what the distinction is between a republic and a democracy. Why don't you open another thread to talk about your corporate conspiracy theories some places.

I have provided a link with these distinctions

I wonder if we have any Political Science Majors posting in this forum so that they can tell us .

It's simply etymological and semantical, there is no need of any specialist, you just need to know your language.

 

[Falcon02]

IIRC there are some directly democratic villages in Switzerland...

hmm... never knew that, but still the issue there is they are not totally autonomous or soverign they are just lower level in the government. The provincial/national government can still impose their will on the villages. I was talking about on a National scale. When Athens was a "True Democracy" the city and adjacent lands were under the rule of Athens and no one else because there was no higher level of government for the area.

But I will concede that on a small scale (small villages and communities) direct democracy has been done sparatically through history, though I believe Athens was the only truely autonomous and soverign one. And, technically the one with the most power concidering their dominance over the Greeks pre-peloponesian wars.

 

[searcheagle]

I have provided a link with these distinctions

I know what the difference between the two is. I am very active in the study of politics. Actually, to me, the debate rather humors me. To me the US is a Republic. However, in the big scheme of things, does it matter whether the US meets the dictionary definition of a democracy? The simple definition isn't going to change the way we do things.

 

[MattII]

The Collins Compact English Dictionary defines:
-Republic n
1. A form of government in which the people or their elected representatives possess the supreme power. 2. A country in which the head of state is an elected or nominated president.
-Democracy n, pl -cies
1. A system of government or organisation in which the citizens or members choose leaders or make other important decisions by voting. 2. A country in which the citizens choose their government by voting.

From the above descriptions we see that the US is either a democracy, a democratic republic or a republic, depending on which explanation/s you choose.

 

[colontos]

actually a republic is not necessarily representative or democratic. in the US it is, so it can best be referred to as a democratic republic. it is not a pure democracy, but it is democratic, whereas the Roman republic, for example, was not.

 

[Zarn]

actually a republic is not necessarily representative or democratic. in the US it is, so it can best be referred to as a democratic republic. it is not a pure democracy, but it is democratic, whereas the Roman republic, for example, was not.

In the classical sense, a Republic has representatives. We should not redefine government forms to our own choosing.

Tell me why these terms must be redefined. What else do we have to redefine.

You know what, I'm sick of the word 'dinosuar' being used to described certain reptiles from the far past, so for now on it means 'lunch.' Since this is the newer definition, it must be accepted.

I'm going to eat my dinosaur now.

 

[Akka]

In the classical sense, a Republic has representatives. We should not redefine government forms to our own choosing.

Well, actually it's the contrary. In the classical sense, a Republic is simply defined by having a non-hereditary head of state.
Nothing about representative.

You should not redefine government forms to your own choosing


And what's this thing about Curt and you exchanging avatar and title ? I thought I was answering to him until I saw the name in the quote

 

[Zarn]

Well, actually it's the contrary. In the classical sense, a Republic is simply defined by having a non-hereditary head of state.
Nothing about representative.

You should not redefine government forms to your own choosing


And what's this thing about Curt and you exchanging avatar and title ? I thought I was answering to him until I saw the name in the quote

I haven't seen any evidence that would show that they defined a republic as just no monarchy.

As corrupt as a Rome was, it was still a Republic due to the elected officials (and not only because it had no monarch).

 

[Leonel]

I think it was Thomas Jefferson that once said "Democracy is like two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner." True Democracy is a great ideal, but like true communism won't work in the real world. People as individuals are clever and intelligent human beings that would most likely push you out of the path of a speeding semi but people as a group are savage, brainless creatures that will destroy everything in its path if provoked. For a true democracy to really work, people would have to free themselves of mob mentality, which is EXTREMELY difficult in a highly politically charged issue as we saw in the 2004 Presidential Elections in the US. It was "Us" versus "Them" and when you get stuck in that mentality, something as simple as "There may be a draft but it would be highly unlikely" turns into "We're going to institute a draft of every able bodied man, woman and child." It can take only one person to blow this out of proportion and push a mob to the brink. And as long as humanity has a mob mentality, true democracy, I personally think, won't really work as human greed stifles true communism.

 

[Xen]

actually a republic is not necessarily representative or democratic. in the US it is, so it can best be referred to as a democratic republic. it is not a pure democracy, but it is democratic, whereas the Roman republic, for example, was not.

that sa fallcay; I havent been keeping up withthe thread, just happend to come in, but if you think the Roman republic wasnt a democratic form of government, your sorelly mistaken, and need to go readc your histories over agian; yes the senate was made up of the "nobility", but the senate was hardley the only body in control of Rome; tribunes aided to keep the senate blaenced, and consular power acted as a fair counter balence as well; by the end of the republic, one consul had to be of Plebian orgin, to so represent the people in that regard; thiers a great deal more to Roman politics then just that, but I honestlly dont feel liek sitting here, and writing it all out.

 

[kronic]

I wonder if we have any Political Science Majors posting in this forum so that they can tell us .

Sure, we have. But note, that there are a lot of different approaches to describe what a democracy is. But at least political scientists (or a overwhelming majority of them) tend to agree that democracies needn't be direct democracies.

At least at my uni, our professors and lecturers agree that the US is a democracy. Some of them have concerns regarding Guantanamo and these things since the connection between democracy and constitutional state is often made. This is based on an extended understanding of the word democracy.

I haven't yet read a scientifc article that claims that the US isn't anymore/never was a democracy.

 

[Zarn]

Sure, we have. But note, that there are a lot of different approaches to describe what a democracy is. But at least political scientists (or a overwhelming majority of them) tend to agree that democracies needn't be direct democracies.

At least at my uni, our professors and lecturers agree that the US is a democracy. Some of them have concerns regarding Guanatanamo and these things since the connection between democracy and constitutional state is often made. This is based on an extended understanding of the word democracy.

I haven't yet read a scientifc article that claims that the US isn't anymore/never was a democracy.

In the U.S. many proffesors say that the U.S. is not a Democracy. These people are constantly studying ORIGINAl documents concerning the US and have extensively studied Classical European history.

 

[kronic]

So they claim that only direct democracies are democracies?

 

[Zarn]

So they claim that only direct democracies are democracies?

I only heard their stance with the US. Most likely they see most of the free world as either republics or constitutional monarchies.