Tuesday, February 21, 2006 |
Democracy versus Republic - Part 1 of 2 |
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands" -- so begins the Pledge of Allegiance. Continuing the Liberty 101 series, today I will begin to explain the difference between a democracy and a republic. And, more importantly, we will discover that knowing the difference is decidedly vital to the future of the United States.
James Madison discussed in his Federalist Paper #10 the effect of democracy. He wrote: Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives, as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of Government, have erroneously supposed, that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions and their passions. As you can see, James Madison would never have wanted a democracy as the form of government for his new nation. In fact, for fear of forming a democracy, Madison -- as well as Alexander Hamilton -- supported the formation of a constitutional monarchy.
In simplest terms, democracy is government by the majority (also known derisively as "mobocracy"). In a pure democracy, 51% rules. Therefore, democracies are free only if the people know what freedom is and are consistent in their exercise of it. If the majority of people don't know freedom or exercise it properly, then a democracy could be just as despotic as the worst dictator. Many of the sources of information that I used pointed to the forced execution of Socrates in the Athenian democracy simply because the people found him intolerable.
The biggest difference between a democracy and a republic is how each defines individual rights. Our Republic's Declaration of Independence states, "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights." In a democracy citizens do not enjoy God-given rights, only civil rights (privileges) granted by a condescending majority. An article by Alexander Marriott in Capitalism Magazine (www.capmag.com) explains the problem with democracies concerning rights, specifically rights of the minority. Mr. Marriott concludes: In the long run, a democracy will always become a tyranny, either by majority, or if the majority screw things up so badly and a tyrant seizes power from the ensuing chaos. The overriding characteristic of democracy is subjectivism and that is its fatal flaw. In other words, reason is irrelevant, whatever the majority wants, it gets and regardless of how unprincipled or objectionable it may be. Rights cannot exist in such a system in the long run because they can be voted away on a whim at any time. Tomorrow, Part 2 or 2. |
posted by Joe Napalm @ 12:43 PM |
|
2 Comments: |
-
"Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the LORD ..." Battle Hymn of the REPUBLIC
-
The founders of the country understood that at the very core of our beings that man is sinful and that a Democracy would not have the country's best interests in mind but would seek to serve self. The Republic allows Democracy to work but also protects us collectively from those who would make decisions based on emotions, feelings. etc. A great example was the train of thought recently where large numbers of Americans felt that the Presidency should not be limited to a U.S. born citizen! I have a feeling that our republic will come under more and more intense pressures in the years to come as logic, reason, and any form of truth is tossed out the window. If all we are left with at the end of the day is politicians instead of leaders we will be in serious trouble. Politicians who make decisions based on polls is almost circumventing the republic?
|
|
<< Home |
|
|
|
|
|
"Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the LORD ..." Battle Hymn of the REPUBLIC