Is America Really A Democracy?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 сер 2024
- Many people think America is governed by a democracy, but is it really? We talked with Ben Swann and he points out that America's government is actually a republic. What's the difference between a democracy and a republic? Ben explains.
Epipheo makes videos that allow for human meaning.
epipheo.com/contact
Let's be social together, o-tay?
The Epipheo Underground: / epipheo
Company updates: / epipheo
Quips and short stuff: / epipheo
Behind-the-scenes: / epipheo
Subscribe, if you're into that:
ua-cam.com/users/subscription_c...
Truth, Story, Love.
epipheo.com
Only certain people in ancient greece had the right to vote on important matters.
+Maris Galesloot
That is the same as in most modern countries today. Not everybody gets to vote.
Do 12 year olds get to vote or do prisoners get to vote. And here is a question can a seriously mentally ill person vote.
Very true, my point was that ancient greece was not a democracy in its purest form. It was very much ahead of its time though.
+Maris Galesloot There has never been a "democracy in it's purest form" ever. Closest ever was Ancient Greece.
+M GG Huge Error only Athens had democracy not all of Greece and it was in its purest form everybody could vote even people that werent from the city.
+BlueRevolvur not women
Ive been brainwashed by my history teacher then ....
Not brainwashed, a clean brain/thinking is good.. you certainly have been programmed though.
The government is brainwashing us D'; !!!!
Education is the key my sister! Don't ever lose hope! Peace and Love from Sydney, AUSTRALIA.
Jude Lind no America is a constitutional representative republic. Yes we do participate in some democratic things, such as elections but in the end America is a republic. It’s the same as saying America is not a socialist country but we do have some socialist things such as public transportation and public education.
Jude Lind shut the fuck up stupid ass America is a republic
Currently in 2022, we have neither a Democracy nor a law abiding Republic.
No, we still live in a Republic. But the Republic is currently a National Security Threat because of our Representatives overemphasis on getting reelected, at the expense of good governance.
We're a plutocracy (rule by the wealthy). We always have been.
“Democracy is like 3 wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner” - I think Thomas Jefferson
@Jokolo Except, that would be cheating. You can live like you don't have to abide by the law because you say so, but that does not make it so. That would be democratic, if you could enforce it.
We, in the US, abide by the rule of law, not the rule of many. There is a defined right and wrong in our system. You cannot outvote this system. Your democratic meetings do not hold any weight, up against the United States Constitution.
I wonder why framers, who called democracies "short-lived" and "violent in death", would consider founding a country as a democracy?
Good luck
Evan
@@Lecreaplay democracy and republic are not mutually exclusive. They usually go hand in hand. That's why one of the first parties in our country was the Democratic-Republicans (now Democrats, since Andrew Jackson I believe). Republic does not mean rule of law. It means Public Thing, or Public Affair. Government is the public's business, not just the business of a king. Democracy means the people hold the power. Both of these are true in the states.
You can have a constitutional monarchy. Heck, you can theoretically have a constitutional theocracy. The US is a federal, constitutional, representative, democratic republic. But it is a democracy.
well its better than one wolf deciding for 3 sheep that's what america has now the government works for the rich and trick the people into voting for them
@@Eazycree If you were one of the rich, would you have a problem with that? Bernie Sanders doesn't have a problem with it... He would create even deeper pockets for himself and his cronies if he were the one deciding: "What's for dinner?"
When did kids start being taught that it was evil to be rich? Should a child not grow up to be all that he can? To have as many friends as he can. To earn as much as he can... to live life as a typical American has the opportunity to live; the best that he can and believes is possible?
Should I have to give up on retiring wealthy because being rich will turn me evil too?
Where is the evidence correlating riches and evil? Where is the evidence to support racist claims? Where are the communists finding their proof these days?
@@Lecreaplay There is nothing wrong with being rich but just because you have wealth should not make your voice matter more, rich americans have a 48% chance to get policy they favour when they donate to a politician (or bribe as I would call it) but working-class americans only have a 18% chance. also sanders is a pussy he cossies up to the democratic party elite which also just work for the rich as they themselves are rich I am in favour of real democracy not the stupid facade america has right now direct democracy is the only real democracy not the corporate democracy we have now where both the government and the corporations work together to fuck working people.
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” ~ Winston S. Churchill
Democracy is the WORST form of government period. The USA was set up to be a constitutional republic. Not a democracy. Anyone who equates the 2 as being the same is just wrong. A constitutional republic & a democracy have very little, if anything, in common. I do not want to get into a long discussions what the differences are, you can look that up for yourself.
@@EbonyBunny1 You can look it up too and find out the Jefferson and Adams had this debate centuries ago and both decided that the USA was a hybrid and that THE US was neither a pure one or the other. I always find it amusing that conservatives relate the words of Democracy and Republic with the political parties. Personally, I think Theocracy is the worst form of government ceteris paribus.
@@GodEqualstheSquaRootof-1 A government that allows anonymous donations is the worse, the rule of law is essential for idiots who wants to vote out essential rights like the 1st and 2nd amendment right
Sounds ironic considering it's coming from a colonialist dictator like Churchill.
And Churchill was *_wholly ignorant_* about the American form of government.
😎♥✝🇺🇸💯
A republic is a nation/country that is not a monarchy thats it, it has absolutely nothing to do with if the country is a democracy or not. Take ROC for example it has been a republic since 1945 (it's even in the name) but only a democracy since the 1980s.
BULLSHIT DUMB FK! This is a constitutional Republic and is the only thing me or my children will accept until our last dying breath. Thank god corporate democracy has been challenge out liberties here lately, its given me the opportunity I needed to educate my children to this fact. To make sure they understand and work hard to preserve it as I have.
@@dungeonmp3
Just because you know how to swear your arse of on the internet doesn't make you right, so shut up.
You are only seeing the results of the American Constitution's broad effect around the world since its inception. Karl Marx was influenced by it and he envisioned a government body a being similar to the US Congress, but Socialist. That became the Supreme Soviet in Russia. Thus all Communist countries modeled their national assemblies after the Soviet model, though representation was/is politically limited to Socialist ideology. So, even though they appear to be democratic, it's a sham. Infact, Communist government are perhaps the best example of what the American Founders sought to avoid : Mob Rule turned Fascist
@Raiden Sadly, for all the best of intentions of the Founders, you may be right. All nations have a life span and the US is now among the oldest Republics on earth.
The constitutions says we are a "constitutional republic"
Name one non-constitutional republic.
Every republic is technically a constitutional republic. A constitution is required to even form a republic.
Great start with the bill of rights. We are a constitutional republic we are nowhere near democracy.
The people's republic of North korea
Hopefully you see how wrong you are....
Ok, I have a couple of questions. I'm not American and grew up in a semi-direct/representative democratic republic (Brazil).
1. Isn't what you explained as the definition of Republic just what a representative democracy really is? By your definition, isn't it still a democracy, just not a direct one?
2. From my understanding, the people in the US do NOT elect the president in any direct way. The electoral college, which is who effectively votes for the president, isn't voted on by the majority of the population, but by the party leaders. Doesn't that go against the definition of Republic you presented?
I'd love to get some clarification on this. Thanks!
+Principality of Zeon so by your definition the minority knows better than the majority because they are smarter, sounds like fascism.
Your first bullet point is spot on. What he described in the video was a "representative democracy", not a Republic. What really defines a Republic, is what they describe in the second part of the video: a constitution.
Your second bullet point is very wrong. The people in the U.S DO elect their president; we have elections every 4 years. However, we do it through the electoral college system, in which each state in the union gets assigned a number of electoral votes, and each candidate looks to win as many states as possible by winning the vote of the people in each state.
First, those that commented that this video grossly oversimplifies both the definitions and the history of democracy are absolutely correct. It is true that Athens was a "direct democracy", but what they neglected to say was that only "free men" were allowed to vote. Ancient Athens was a sort of "representative" democracy in the sense that the majority of the population was spoken for by proxy in the official legislation. Only those men who had land, each usually having more than one wife and, on average, at least 3 slaves, represented the "interests" of all of those people. This video gives the impression that every adult was allowed a vote on every matter and that was just simply not the case at all. Ancient Athens was a very unfair society by today's standards, far from being an enlightened democratic Utopia.
Second, to mention briefly only the Founding Fathers as some guys who hated democracy and so made up some ruling document and shoved it down everyone's throats is an even more egregious oversimplification. The content of the Constitution was hotly debated all the way up to the ratification referendums. Not all of the Founding Fathers believed the same thing about the level of centralization of authority, indeed a reading of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers will show that they debated ideas not of their own design, but were mostly discussing their opinions about the implementing of the ideas about democracies and republics of Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau. To not discuss these Enlightenment philosophers, the context, and their contemporaries is to throw away the true gist of the debates between the Founding Fathers and what they REALLY had to say. This video might not have been long enough to go into all of that, but it really grinds my gears to watch the pundits on the extreme left and extreme right use these oversimplifications to justify their own ideological blabbering.
Those that have the ear of the people and are not willing to spend any more than three minutes on the subject are what is REALLY wrong with our government.
There are things "wrong" with our government, sure. Not every UA-cam video can address these issues and bring light to the situation. Even though some UA-cam videos openly discuss the issues that our government is undergoing, most of these are bound to be inaccurate or only partial truths. This video is about promoting the fact that we are a Republic.
People have been convinced that we are a Democracy, in which Mob rules, when in fact The Law rules. According to the left and their "representation" of the masses, most Americans want my guns out of my untrustworthy hands. The Mob doesn't rule, so it cannot be accomplished by simply polling Americans. Minds are easily manipulated handfuls at a time. Questions in polls are phrased to deceive... as the poll that was referred to by the left asked the question "Would you be willing to support a Law that required Universal Background Checks and Gun Registration that kept the hands out of the hands of criminals". This may be only a partial truth because I may be recalling the poll question inaccurately, but the point remains. The real question they are trying to push is would you want to keep the guns out of hands of criminals. Even those of us who own and use guns would answer yes. As we know, Registration is not an accurate method of keeping criminals from obtaining firearms. Registration is a large step in order for confiscation to be achieved.
The Founding Fathers instituted the Rule of Law for a reason.
Chris Van Bekkum Nature never changed lol. MAGA!
Firstly should be tldr.
Why I like the fact that you’re honest about the fact that you liberals want to destroy this government Probably murder a half million Republicans in the process But good thing we have a constitutional republic Were the minority is protected from The the majority Who obviously want to strip their rights turn them nothing but slaves
@@LordInquisitor701 You've just created the largest strawman I've seen in a long time.
Probably large enough for some Englishmen to burn at a midsummer festival.
It's funny that in Greek language "republic" and "democracy" is the same word ;D
America is a constitutional republic, which simplified is a representative democracy, which is a revised form of democracy. We do not vote on federal laws directly but we do indirectly when we vote for representatives. James Wilson, one of the main drafters of the Constitution and one of the first Supreme Court justices, defended the Constitution in 1787 by speaking of the three forms of government being the "monarchical, aristocratical, and democratical," and said that in a democracy the sovereign power is "inherent in the people, and is either exercised by themselves or by their representatives." This makes the argument on democracy though it may not be a true democracy, it is still again, a form of democracy.
"Representative democracy" was understood as a form of democracy, alongside "pure democracy": John Adams used the term "representative democracy" in 1794; so did Noah Webster in 1785; so did St. George Tucker in his 1803 edition of Blackstone; so did Thomas Jefferson in 1815. Tucker's Blackstone likewise uses "democracy" to describe a representative democracy, even when the qualifier "representative" is omitted.
Likewise, James Wilson, one of the main drafters of the Constitution and one of the first Supreme Court justices, defended the Constitution in 1787 by speaking of the three forms of government being the "monarchical, aristocratical, and democratical," and said that in a democracy the sovereign power is "inherent in the people, and is either exercised by themselves or by their representatives." Chief Justice John Marshall-who helped lead the fight in the 1788 Virginia Convention for ratifying the U.S. Constitution-likewise defended the Constitution in that convention by describing it as implementing "democracy" (as opposed to "despotism"), and without the need to even add the qualifier "representative."
Sir William Blackstone, who was much read and admired by the framers, likewise used "democracy" to include republics: "Baron Montesquieu lays it down, that luxury is necessary in monarchies, as in France; but ruinous to democracies, as in Holland. With regard therefore to England, whose government is compounded of both species, it may still be a dubious question, how far private luxury is a public evil …." Holland was of course a republic, and England was compounded of monarchy and government by elected representatives; Blackstone was thus labeling such government by elected representatives as a form of "democrac[y]."
What was described as “Democracy” in this video is “Direct Democracy”, while the “Republic” is actually a “Representative Democracy”.
not represented democracy but constitutional republic with democratic representation.
@@viperdemonz-jenkins That’s the same thing. Representative Democracy is when elected officials represent the population in government to vote on issues on their behalf, in contrast to Direct Democracy where people directly vote on issues. Constitutional Republic is a nation that is guided by the Rule of Law of the people, rather than Mob Rule or Ruler’s Law (Dictatorship), most nations that practice representative democracy (whether Presidential or Parliamentary) are always governed by the law and by the consent of the people. It’s a Federal system, because distributed among the Federal, State and Local (or Municipal) governments rather than centralising the power into the Federal government. It’s a Presidential system, because the federal executive power is invested into the “President”, who is the Head of State in addition to the Head of Government, as well as the Commander-In-Chief. So the United States is a Federal Presidential Constitutional Republic with a Representative Democracy.
That’s false , we are nowhere near democracy. It’s not about leaders or representatives that would be a democracy.. It’s everything throughout the entire system the bill of rights They are not your rights They are a set of restrictions placed on the government. Natural rights Cannot be removed you have them no matter what. If the government were to write them down and say here’s your right, guess what the government can remove them like in a democracy.
No one or no channel can explain someting or anything better than Epipheo!!!
This is wrong. James Madison created out of whole cloth the distinction between a republic and a democracy. Robert Dahl, one of the greatest scholars on democracy, in his book "On Democracy," says this about Madison's distinction: "This distinction had no basis in prior history: neither in Rome nor, for example, in Venice was there a scheme of representation. Indeed, the earlier republics all pretty much fit into Madison's definition of a 'democracy.' What is more, the two terms were used interchangeably in the United States during the eighteenth century...[T]he plain fact is that the words 'democracy' and 'republic' did not (despite Madison) designate differences in types of popular government. What they reflected, at the cost of later confusion, was a difference between Greek and Latin, the languages from which they came" (16-17).
Democracy inevitably leads to tyranny. Federalism, or the democratic-republic, is the best form of government people have come up with yet. It is the answer to life's riddle. Sorry Karl Marx.
Democracy leads to tyranny? Would you care to cite some evidence to back that up?
I rather think that the destruction of democratic institutions leads to tyranny.
We are constitutional republic.
We are also a democracy.
And a federation.
@@owlblocksdavid4955 we are a democracy when people go out and burn shit
@Rory Mulligan i know and thats why were a republic and not a democracy
@@quantum7690 both concepts are not oposite, a republic can be (and most times is) a democracy
Thanks for the reply.
Constitutional Republic. THAT is what The United States of America is.
Is this guy the guy from the bible project?
John Collins. You may be right
Oh. What a surprise. 🙄
The thick plottens.
TL;DR: This video is unfortunately misleading. It contains accurate facts, but it also cherry picks information to create a negative bias that will lead people to be misinformed. I have briefly read the comments and noticed some people have touched upon some of the things I would like to say. Please note that the following is a simplified explanation (If you can believe it. Sorry for the long post.) of the complex nature of government, however, it should be sufficient enough to properly explain the main ones revolving around democracy. First, the United States of America is both a democracy AND a republic, or specifically is a federal presidential constitutional republic. (More on that later.) The key to understanding this statement is by defining all terms involved.
Over the course of history, we have had two definitions of democracy, which has led to confusion in distinguishing between the two with one capitalized as “Democracy” and the other as lower-case “democracy”.
Small “d” democracy is an umbrella term to describe a variety forms of democratic governments that we have today or had in the past. (An analogy: Dog is an umbrella term to describe a variety of dog breeds that there are in the world.) Small “d” democracy is defined as a government where all the people of a state are involved in making decisions about its affairs either directly or indirectly. There are two main forms or sub-categories of democracy.
Big “D” Democracy is known today as a pure democracy, or a direct democracy. This is a variant or sub-category of the umbrella term (small “d”) democracy. Pure democracy is defined as a form of democratic government where the people decide policy either by voting or forming a consensus on. In a pure democracy, the people are directly involved in governmental affairs. Ancient Athens had this form of democracy, which is also known as Athenian democracy. For the most part, this form of government is very rare today, however, it does exist in the form of ballot initiatives like referendums on the state level in the United States, or certain Swiss districts. NOTE: The United States is NOT considered a pure democracy even though some of the states have ballot initiatives.
The other sub-category or variant of (small “d”) democracy is a representative democracy, or an indirect democracy. Representative democracy is defined as a form of democratic government where the people elect officials, or representatives, to create and implement policy on behalf of the people. In a representative democracy, the people are indirectly involved in government. NOTE: All Western-style democracies are examples of a representative democracy.
Expanding even further on representative democracy, there are two forms: a constitutional monarchy (e.g. United Kingdom) and a constitutional republic (e.g. United States). Constitutional monarchies are also known as limited monarchies and they are essentially the metamorphosis from an absolute monarchy (i.e. rule of royalty) to a representative democracy through a constitution (i.e. rule of law). Constitutional monarchy is defined as a form of monarchical government where the monarch’s powers are limited by law or by a formal constitution, which allows the government to have a representative democracy. Constitutional republic is defined as a form of representative democratic government where the government’s powers are limited by law or a formal constitution, and does not have a monarch as a head of state.
Regarding the Founding Fathers: yes, they frequently did voice their disdain of (big “D”) Democracy as well as praised the idea of our country as a Republic. The Founders simply did not trust the people to directly create policy out of the fear of a majority rule, or mob rule. However, their fear was/is justified because a majority rule does have the potential to infringe on a minority group’s rights.
The problem is that language evolves over time and alternate words can have the same definition as another word in the past. To clarify, the terms representative democracy and pure democracy were not used during the time of the Founding Fathers. Their definition of (big “D”) Democracy is the same definition of a pure democracy and their definition of a Republic is the same definition of a representative democracy. The reason why terms are different today is to provide clarification as well as to simplify the issue of democracy having two definitions. Be careful when reading terms in the past. The terms are NOT important; what DEFINES them are. Definitions usually transcend time while words change. Words either lose all meaning and/or adopt a new meaning. If you trace the definitions from then to now, you will be able to connect the dots to the modern word.
Now some may say, “Wait a minute, a Republic is a rule of law, not a rule of people!” You are correct, at least in the classical sense. In modern times, rule of law is an extra component through a constitution, which is defined as a set of fundamental principles according to which a state is governed. At the time, a republic was at default defined to be a “rule of law.”
Today, the simplest definition of a republic is a government where offices of the state, such as the Head of State, is elected or appointed rather than inherited (i.e. a monarch). Basically, any government that does not have a monarch as a Head of State is a republic, which means a (small “r”) republican government can be either democratic or authoritarian. As defined, we know that the presence of a constitution acts as a safeguard to protect the rights of all citizens in a democratic society, which helps to prevent a republic from becoming a dictatorship. There are over a 140 countries today that refer to themselves officially as a republic, but not all of them are truly free and provide a democratic process. Cuba is officially known as the Republic of Cuba, and yet Cuba has a single-party rule. Therefore, a republic does NOT automatically guarantee a nation as being a “rule of law.”
So, next time you hear someone say, “American democracy” or “democracy in action”, they are perhaps referring to a representative democracy for the former and the umbrella term (small “d”) democracy for the latter. There is nothing wrong with that and just as appropriate as is referring to our country as a constitutional republic, which is simply more specific than the other terms. The United States of America IS a democracy, a representative democracy, and a constitutional republic. It is NOT a pure democracy (for the most part; see above). This is a great phrase to sum EVERYTHING up:
“All constitutional republics are democracies, but not all democracies are constitutional republics.” (An analogy: All Siberian Huskies are dogs, but not all dogs are Siberian Huskies.)
Governments are very complicated, and power structure and power sources at times overlap with one another. It is very easy to lose meaning when we simplify things, but we owe it to one another to try and be as sincere and efficient as possible in our delivery. I am not a political scientist, but I have read and studied various texts over the years on top of my original education. I hope this helps and encourages people to search for the answers for themselves, and not take my word for it! Good luck.
Mike Varde yeah it so simplified that it gets misleading
i cant believe i read that xD but your right
Great video
Awsome to have Ben in the vid, Really very happy to have found this because people look at me like I am stupid when saying we are a republic no matter what evidence I give them...Totally going to spread this around!
At the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Franklin was queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation. In the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention, a lady asked Dr. Franklin “Well Doctor what have we got, a republic or a monarchy.” Franklin replied, “A republic . . . if you can keep it.”
The authenticity of that quote is highly disputed among historians, by the way. Add that to the “wolves/sheep” quote that was confirmed to be completely fabricated, and you realize this whole ignorant “we’re not a democracy” argument is built on lies and misinformation.
@@HorrorMetalDnD This fool did some fact checks on the internet, clicking the first few links that pop up on his browser, and now pretends he knows better than someone who has been researching the lies and manipulations of our media and society for over a decade. Go look at simply the videos in my playlists, then understand I have information from books and documents that go back decades and even centuries. I have the actual facts and evidence while all you have is a link to some corporate "politically correct" website you parrot blindly. I have to watch what I even discuss or my comment gets censored but you get to call me fake news and pretend you are right. "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." - William J. Casey, CIA Director (1981) - "History is a set of lies agreed upon." Napoleon -- One final thing about your comment "and you realize this whole ignorant “we’re not a democracy” argument is built on lies and misinformation." - It is literally in the Pledge of Allegiance. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS..." You live in a fantasy. "All the world's a stage"
how do u guys make that kind of videos....?????that type of animation....??can u tell me the name of the software u use for making that..
I have to say this video missed the point on difference. It is not about whether the people vote direct or through representation but rather if the law established the powers given to the government and restricts what can be governed
Possible to form a collaboration to form an ephpheo environmental TV?
This video is awesome! Great job putting it together, epipheo guys!
"If voting mattered, it would be illegal"
While amusing, voting DOES matter. That's how we *democratically* elect our representatives.
@@owlblocksdavid4955 in theory yes, in practice though....
Wasn’t the original democracies of Ancient Greece also constitutional forms of government, since they had some form of written or oral constitution, such as in Athens or Sparta?
We Do Not live in a democracy.
We live in a Constitutional Republic.
It's important to know the difference.
In a democracy, the sovereignty is in the whole body of the citizens. The sovereignty is not divided to smaller units such as individual citizens. To solve a problem, only the whole body politic is authorized to act. Also, being citizens, individuals have duties and obligations to the government. The governments only obligations to the citizens are those legislatively pre-defined for it by the whole body politic.
In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the Free People themselves, whether one or many. In a Republic, one may act on his/her own or through representatives as they choose to solve a problem. Further, the People have no obligation to the government; instead, the government being hired by the People, is obliged to its owner, We the People. (See 10th Amendment if you do not know.)
“A Constitutional Republic” is a government created and controlled, at least, by the Law of a Constitution.
(See Article IV, Section 4)
The Constitution of the United States of America was, in Law, foundationally based on the Bible, the Magna Carta, and the Declaration of Independence. Those documents known as the Charters of Freedom, recognize mans sovereignty, the Divine nature of mans creation and mans divine right to Life, Liberty, Property, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
(Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.)
hey I know this is out of context but is the gakactic republic a democracy or a republic beacause I see a lot of democratic scenes in the clone wars
Great video guys! I'm a huge fan of your work! Very interesting concept as always and great animating as well!
Our constitutional republic is a representative democracy ... not a pure democracy, but a form of democracy.
"The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone."
- James Madison, Father of the Constitution of the United States of America.
democracy = the people rule
great question. i guess anything is possible, but a true 1 person 1 vote per issue democracy would likely be too chaotic in an under educated large scale country (like mine, the US). however, at this point the chaos of a bunch of people who are unaware of the pressing issues and gentle balance of an economy deciding how it is shaped via an ill informed vote scares me less than the rich people in my republic buying and propagandizing the vote and pulling the strings from the shadows to their ends
Can you do Tutorials how to make this cartoons? :)
"We prefer this system to any monarchy because we are convinced that it has a greater tendency to secure our liberty and promote our happiness. We admire it because we think it a well-regulated democracy: it is recommended to the good people of this country: they are, through us, to declare whether it be such a plan of government as will establish and secure their freedom."
- John Marshall, Liberty Letters, 10 June 1788
@@fatherbootyhands The pledge is not law. The Constitution is. " Article IV, Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government..."
@@fatherbootyhandslol ok ? The USA is a Constitutional Republic AND a Representative Democracy they are not mutually exclusive. ..did you graduate 5th grade? If not you could consult a dictionary. (Although I assume you may be one of those people that will actually try and argue a dictionary definition)...you don't have a fundamental basic understanding of our government. Probably because you heard or read some idiot, like yourself, reference our Republic in the pledge of allegiance...we vote for politicians to represent us. No matter how you try and label that, that is the dictionary definition of a Representative Democracy. It is not an opinion and it is not up for debate. It is literal fact that the USA is an example of a Democracy, and always has been
@@geyerbrad1right. The USA is a Constitutional Republic...it is ALSO an example of a Representative Democracy. Most people learn this around 4th or 5th grade. To try and argue otherwise only shows your complete lack of a basic understanding of the USA government
I'm sorry that you cannot read. @@justinkoeberl5797
The word "democracy" has several meanings. From the Greek : "the people rule." @@justinkoeberl5797
I do love this definition. Quite succinctly put. I do also note that under this nomenclature, my country, Australia, is both a Republic AND a Constitutional Monarchy. Similarly in New Zealand, Canada, and for that matter the UK. Hopefully we will be a Republic in every sense of the word soon!
Rory Mulligan - Actually, not necessarily mutually exclusive, according to many definitions of a ‘Republic’ (including as outlined in this video). Look up the term ‘crowned Republic’. It’s not an official title by any means, but let me know your thoughts. Happy to continue this discussion.
@@doubtingthomas6146, crown republic is more like a euphemism. Republic has traditionally been defined, and is still defined, as a country with an elected or nominated head of state instead of a monarch. That has been its sole consistent trait.
Also, for anyone reading this who insists on saying “constitutional republic,” there’s literally no such thing as a non-constitutional republic (a constitution is required to even form a republic), so at best it’s redundant. Plus, a constitution is simply a charter for a state or country.
"and to the REPUBLIC, for which it stands, one nation under god indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
wonder why they took this out of schools.
Because it's brainwashing and it should have no place in an educational institution?
Could you make a video on how to be a functioning alcoholic/addict ?
your description of republic is wrong
In Australia we vote for representatives who make the law
yet we are not a republic we are a constitutional monarchy
explain this
*****
NerdZombles 04 You're absolutely correct and I can explain it. That is because the video uses an outdated definition of a republic from the late 18th century that shares the same definition with today's term: representative democracy. Terms had to be moved around because after America was founded, many countries around the world that had an absolute monarchy were transitioning towards a limited monarchy, which is a type of representative democracy. The old definition of republic did NOT properly describe these new democratic countries, so words had to adapt.
Today, the simplest definition of a republic is a government where offices of the state, such as the Head of State, is elected or appointed rather than inherited (i.e. a monarch). Basically, any government that does not have a monarch as a Head of State is a republic. If a representative democracy with a constitution has a monarch as the Head of State (In Australia's case, Queen Elizabeth II), then they are a constitutional monarchy, or limited monarchy as mentioned above. Since the United States is a representative democracy with a constitution and we do NOT have a monarch as the Head of State (i.e. the President of USA), we are considered a constitutional republic.
Unfortunately, people in America have this misleading view and don't realize that there are other countries out there who have a similar government to ours (i.e. representative democracy). I hope I was able to explain this for you. For those who want to learn more, I explained all of this in greater detail in a comment on this video.
Mike Wa
You are both wrong in this concept.
Australia can call its self the grand universal empire if it desires. But that does not change the fact that it is using a system of republic with a "Roman dictator" in the form of a Monarch.
That Monarch that is used in the Australian model has a Governor as a representative that hold office.
Mike Wa
There is no such thing as representative democracy.
When people refer to such a system they do not understand the system that the Romans had in place.
bighands69 In regards to your first comment, you cannot apply the term "republic" with Australia. I already provided the modern definition of a republic, which is a government where offices of the state, such as the Head of State, is elected or appointed rather than inherited (i.e. a monarch). (I went in greater detail in another post on this video around the same day as my original comment answering NerdZombies04's question if you want or need further proof.) I then reiterated and stated that "basically, any government that does not have a monarch as a Head of State is a republic." Australia recognizes Queen Elizabeth II as their Head of State, therefore they are not labeled as a republic. And you're right, Australians can label their country however they want, but that does not change what power source and structure of government they have. Cuba officially recognizes itself as the "Republic of Cuba", yet we all know they have a single-party rule of government. Australia is formally a "constitutional monarchy" because the people recognize a monarch as their Head of State and they have a democratic form of government where the people elect representatives to create legislation on their behalf.
With your second comment, there is such thing as a "representative democracy." A simple Google or Wikipedia search (as well as countless texts) will clearly indicate that the term exists, and in addition defines a variety of countries including most (if not all where applicable) in Australia (continent), Europe, North America, and South America as well as some in Asia and Africa. Also, I do understand what system of government the Romans had in place, which was a mixture of representative and direct democracy. (The Roman Senate had representatives, although they were appointed and not elected, while the Roman Assemblies allowed the citizens to vote directly on legislation as a way to check the Senate and the executive branch's power.)
I am open to hear your position in greater detail, but you need to provide supporting evidence in order to convince me and others because like you said earlier about Australia (and I'll paraphrase), 'anyone can label and say whatever they want, however, it does not change the facts.'
NerdZombles 04 a monarchy and a republic is the same thing in terms of English civil liberties.
USA and Australia both have a head of state one is a queen other is a president both have executive order its just the Westminster style the head of sate is weak wear as in the USA the head of state is strong.
Australia parliament is supreme whereas congress is not as supreme.
I think you have confused a republic with representative democracy, as a posed to direct democracy.
Keir Zesty I think not only he does, but the majority of Americans as well
No
The Western fake "democracies" are Plutocratic Aristocracies, elections enable oligarchy, factions of the wealthy jockey for power while supporting the media coverage and campaigns finance(bribery) of one side or both sides, while the people are dumbed down to take the role of spectators in a theatre ritual that is the election spectacle. It is NOT a system of/by/for the People but of/by/for the Elites, that is Aristocracy. We elect Corrupt Aristocrats. Bankers and Corrupt Aristocrats dont want real democracy where the people decide, of course, what would you expect? they are not going to say Democracy is best and thats why you hear anti-democratic rhetoric like "mob-rule" in the education system and media which they influence, thats like the Foxes telling the Hens that the few Foxes should decide on the rules, they have the expertise, otherwise its mob rules so the Hens should not decide what the rules of the Hen House is. Dictators, Fascists, Monarchs, NeoFeudal Barons, Warlords and Mobsters will all tell you that democracy is bad, its mob rule, its 2 wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner, of course they will tell you that a few should decide.
"Rule of Law" is sophistry, Laws dont fall down from the sky, men make them, in a non democracy a small group makes laws that benefit them or their plutocratic patrons, and the majority not only dont vote but dont even have a Say, often out of any debate any discussions, the few impose unilaterally hte law without even discussions with the people, and the paid politicians are in a conflict of interest. Rule of Law to justify non-democratic system that benefits the 1%, is as phoney as the Divine right of Kings, the King is right, sure he is, Bankers should be given trillions, war profiteering wars should be waged, State(supposedly of by/for/the people) secrets should be kept secret from the very People(!?!), after all its the magical Rule of Law, its not like laws are drawn by men who also by coincidence choose those that benefit politicians, oh no, its an emanation that magically appears, laws are not made by men but transmogrified out of nothing.
And Money is created as credit, its not like its Bankers that have pushed for fractional reserve banking, usury and interest paid on credit made out of nothing and a privately owned Federal Reserve should benefit them, no, its all laws that came out of the blue, not by paid politicians...
A real democracy is Not perfect, it will have this and that problem which could be fixed or mitigated along the way, but it is better than Elective Aristocracy that benefits the 1%.
That's a representative democracy.
if america was a democracy
marijuana would be legal
In the words of a truly great American "If voting mattered they wouden't let us do it" MARK TWAIN.
+Stewie Griffin this might not be taken as being serious, but i take it serious.
+Stewie Griffin If America stayed true to its republic philosophy, we wouldn't have drug prohibition to begin with.
+Stewie Griffin actually if we were really free we would be able to put whatever we want into our bodies, it's called freedom and it is what a libertarian believes, a lack of government. Progressives believe that government should rule everything we do, hence Democrats are demons.
Marijuana IS legal, for example in my home state. It's illegal at the federal level, but many states have nullified that law (not officially, but effectively, declaring it unconstitutional and refusing to enforce it). That's because we're a *federal* republic/democracy... not everything is consistent from state to state.
Ok so, it's important to remember that a republic (representative democracy) is a type of democracy, the other being a direct democracy. What is being compared here is direct/indirect democracy. The US is not a democracy. That's not because it's a republic, it's because it's an oligarchy, where a small number of wealthy and powerful people have the ultimate decision making power.
WE ARE A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC (RULE OF LAWS) YOU WILL NEVER FIND THE WORD democracy (rule of the mob-vigilantes) IN ANY FOUNDING DOCUMENTS OR LETTERS WRITTEN TO EACH OTHER
constitutional republic with democratic represention, not represented democracy. definitions have been altered to brainwash the masses into thinking we are not a republic.
@@rabbijosiah9237 that’s quite irrelevant to the definition of democracy.
@@rabbijosiah9237 all democracies are governed w the rule of law
@@viperdemonz-jenkins a constitutional republic is a democracy w a constitution and elected or appointed head of state. germany and italy are also constitutional republic, so is ireland
Another point to add - We only have two parties and other countries have other parties like Canada, we are restricted and forced to vote for either the two that is closest to our ideals
That's a pretty simplistic view. What about voting for individual candidates, especially when considering that two candidates from the same party can have two different agendas?
Because Obamacare is a health care Mandate. Putting government in health care means higher cost for those who have it, and people who don't have it will have to pay for health care OR pay a penalty for Not having health care. America was created on values of individual liberty and property rights. Forcing people to pay for having or not having a product or service is a violation of liberty.
Also, Romney doesn't want to get rid of Obamacare. He wants to replace it with his own similar plan.
I'm pretty sure we live in a representative democracy? Am I wrong?
rossschcheese
You are not wrong, in fact you are correct
We're a representative democracy, as well as a constitutional republic. They mean pretty much the same thing. To say we aren't a democracy is objectively false because a representative democracy is still a democracy. We're not the old-timey direct democracy that really isn't seen too much in the modern era. But words change meaning over time and they change meaning based on context. When somebody says "The US is a democracy" the representative part is implicit. Just as in this video that rightfully refers to the US as a republic, the constitutional part is implicit.
YES! the only people who say that the US isn't a democracy are people who are OK with minority rule (billionaires making laws).
As a Sociology professor, I found your video good for high school to early college students...it's simple, funny, and speaks with authority but is not authoritarian in the approach :) Thanks for making it!
But you do realize this is simplistic, right? There is nothing to say that a democracy and a republic can't be the same thing. In fact, they often are part of the same thing. And democracy is not necessarily mob rule any more than a republic is kleptocratic rule.
No way you're a sociology professor.
de·moc·ra·cy
noun
a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
Does ou vote for who is elected president really count?
西方所谓的普世价值观 － 自由民主，其实相互矛盾。
自由主义以人权至上；民主即少数服从多数。
While the universal Western belief is that Liberty and Democracy is a match made in heaven, there is actually a fundamental contradiction between the 2.
Democracy, in essence, means "Rule by Majority" while Liberty relates to "Self Determination". They are, by nature, opposing ideals.
若人人皆自由，就应该享有自主权。那么，少数何需服从多数呢？
Why must the minority be subjected to majority rule, since it is entitled to the right of determining its own destiny?
尽管占少数，服从的本质与自由的价值是相对立的。届时，社会将瓦解至无政府状态，人人追求自我诠释的自由。由此，人与人之间对自由的定义也无可避免地互相产生摩擦。冲突频频，百姓大众能享有真正的人权自由吗？
人民力量仅是单纯的数字游戏吗？
“有志者事尽成” － 人民要施展其力量，大众的意志必不可缺。贫穷积弱的人口大国有何国力可言？
In the extreme exercise of Freedom, a society breaks down into an Anarchy which results in a clash of Liberal Human Rights as conflicts arise when my rights infringe upon yours. Will Human Rights be realized then?
"Rule by Majority" is tied to "People Power" which under Democracy, means Numbers. But, do we ever rule by sheer numbers? Willpower is a vital quality of "People Power" which is hard to quantify. But, real "People Power" is definitely more complex. As Albert Einstein once claimed, "What can be counted may not truly count; what cannot be counted may truly count."
Which is why the Founding fathers of the USA made the United States a Republic. They knew that if the people had 100% majority power then anarchy could happen which could allow someone to take power and create Fascism/dictatorship. In a democracy the people make rules based on majority. In a Republic, the people are protected by the law.
***** The ancient Roman Republic eventually turned into an Empire. :)
In Ancient Greece women and Slaves couldn’t vote, so no EVERYONE didn’t choose, a minority did
Rory Mulligan yes but by modern standards all adults who are citizens should have the right to vote for it to be called democracy
Rory Mulligan exactly so that would include women
Rory Mulligan my original comment was that the majority didn’t vote and that’s still correct
Rory Mulligan they were idolising Ancient Greece as a democracy, we must both agree that having rules for eligibility that harsh it’s not democratic
@Rory Mulligan if you're trying to die on the hill of "Ancient Athens was really a democracy" you'll be alone. It was close to democracy in its purest form, except for, as someone pointed out to you, the vast majority which were women and slaves did not vote. Your logic is entirely circular: they aren't citizens therefore they shouldn't vote anyways therefore its democratic. That's just ridiculous. Just like America did not offer suffrage to these populations until they fought for it, ancient Athenian democracy was truly a farce.
Im 17 years old and I am slowly becoming a social activist and all of your videos are outstanding. I subscribed.
So, how's life going?
@@shamimbd17 probably filled with student loans
In the history of humanity we have tried many ways to govern ourselves: Kings, Queens, Princes, Generals, Tyrannies, Satraps, Dictators, Presidents, General Secretaries, Prime Ministers, Consuls, Sha, Sheikhs, Emirs, Sultans, Caliphs, Emperors , Tsars, and more. It is with the US that Democracy arrived. Ah…! The best in the world, right? Well, not exactly. Democracy has many defects, the first problem, the continuity of a country project. Every four, six or eight years, the project is changed and another Administration is started that has its own ideas and again, sometimes starting from zero. Another drawback of Democracy is that when electing a citizen as President, he is accompanied by hundreds of Public Officials, or the "Cabinet", to govern the country. Officials that NOBODY elected. Officials who owe the position to a single man: TO THE PRESIDENT! Not the people. To the President. The "Cabinet" is accountable to no one but the President. Which means that if he does something improper or embezzles the treasury, who will point out his corruption? Nobody. Cuz the entire "Govt. Team" is committed to its Boss. Another little problem with Democracy is that any citizen can come to power and thus, for example, we have in the US, a WWE professional wrestler, Jesse Ventura, who was Governor of Minnesota. A Mr. Universe weightlifter, Arnold Schwarzenegger, ruled California. A Hollywood actor, Ronald Reagan, President. A Donald Trump, the worst qualified for the job, also arrived. (Look: A coca grower leader, Evo Morales, was re-elected "democratically" until he was kicked out. In Honduras, President Juan Orlando Hernández, linked to Drug Trafficking. Jimmy Morales, a television comedian, became President of Guatemala. The Boxer Manny Pacquiao was a Senator from the Republic of the Philippines). Now let's see. Nowhere in our Constitution does it speak of Democracy, or Capitalism, and much less Socialism. Why? Cuz Democracy sucks; Capitalism sucks and Socialism sucks twice. In the US, a Democracy works, more or less, but, with only two political parties. (Mexico has eight; Canada has five), Here in US, it is an Indirect and NOT Representative Democracy. In the US, the majority does NOT rule, as it does in the rest of the world's Democracies. Why the System like this? Cuz Democracy has a risk; The risk of being manipulated. The drawback with Democracy is that the majority rules, and the majority frequently make mistakes; it is not perfect. For the rest, the real "Government Problem" is that SOMEONE HAS TO DO IT! And it does not matter who is put in charge, it generates a conflict of interest and comes the "Take off you, that I put on". To solve the "Problem of Government" we have learned that what works, stays. What does not is changed. If for other nations the thing works, it goes; if it doesn't work, out! In Spain, for example, they do not have a President, they have a Head of Government, endorsed by a Monarchy, who in turn must be accountable to a Congress. If it works for them that way, then good. Go. In Cuba there is a one-party dictatorship, with a Socialist Govt System. Well, okay... if it works for the Cuban people and it doesn't change it, is fine. Did I explain myself? Democracy is not the only Government System; It is not even the best System. Finally, China must be ruled with a strong leader now. Later will have the luxury of trying out a Democracy. Today, they can't do it… it wouldn't work for them.
Um, what they had in Ancient Greece was DIRECT democracy. In America, it's still a democracy, but it's REPRESENTATIVE democracy. Both are valid forms of democracies.
Stefan
There is no such thing as a representative democracy.
Study the Roman republic era and you will understand how the American Republic was founded.
bighands69 There is such a thing as representative democracy... en.wikipedia.org/?title=Representative_democracy
Stefan
There is no such thing as representative democracy.
It is either Democracy or a Republic.
Did you research the Roman republic.
bighands69 It is both a democracy and a republic.
Stefan The vote is a bit misrepresentative though, so compared to alot of countries, it's not that democratic.
Best
Smartest
Ethical
Moral
Upright
Riiiiiiiiiight...
Does a Republic have to have elected representatives? or just the rule of law?
ex.
Hammurabi created a code of laws that not only his people but more uniquely government administrators including kings like himself had to abide by. But, Hammurabi wasn't elected. Everyone in the kingdom was ruled by laws, none of which were passed by elective representatives, was it still a republic?
The Founding Fathers were wrong. Democracy is not Mob Rule. Mob Rule is the control of a political situation by those outside the conventional or lawful realm, typically involving violence and intimidation. Democracy is a form of government in which the people have the authority to deliberate and decide legislation, or to choose governing officials to do so. In a democracy, the people are all within the conventional and lawful realm, and there is no one outside of it to do Mob Rule. Maybe the definitions of "Democracy" and "Mob Rule" were different back then? If so, can anyone tell me what the definition of "Mob Rule" was back then?
Finally not a boring history video!!!!! Thank youuuu
it‘s ’moneycracy
Damn straight it is.
The USA is both a representative democracy and a constitutional republic. Greece was something called direct democracy which means that everyone votes on every decision made by the government, but since that isn't practical in a modern country, we elect representatives to vote on for example which laws should and shouldn't be enacted. This is the form of government that virtually every western nation has, but most western nation are also republics, constitutional republics to be precise. Yes, countries can both be a democracy and a republic, because a republic is every nation that doesn't have a Monarch. The " constitutional" in constitutional republic means that the country has a constitution. In a democracy that has a constitution, like the USA, Canada, Mexico, the UK, Germany and many more, the constitution still applies, meaning that it isn’t mob rule. Yes, with enough seats in parliament the constitution can be changed, also in the USA, which is important because, for example, sometimes our moral understanding shifts and the laws have to adapt to this new moral understanding. It happened several times in every country and will surely happen several times again. This is why the USA is both a representative democracy and a constitutional republic.
what's the solution?
“i love democracy”
You mean “I love Republic”
This is one of the many reasons I can't take libertarians seriously. When someone says "America is a democracy", do you really think they mean it is a direct democracy without a rule of law or constitution to limit state power? Why use this straw man? Constitutional republics, along with constitutional monarchies, are forms of liberal democracy. Using quotes from founding fathers 300 years ago is pointless when the connotation behind democracy has changed since then.
Democracy is rule of the people. Republic is rule of law. If the people believe they are the rulers and they do whatever they want, ignoring and breaking the law, they are criminals. They are not citizens of any form of a Democracy just because they act like they rule.
The Constitution of the United States
Article IV, Section 4 - Republican Government
The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican form of Government.
If you studied anything when the Founding Fathers created the Nation, you would realize that they did realize that Democracies lead to Oligarchies. You simply believe you are smarter than the Founding Fathers and that the English language has somehow evolved. When in truth, the language has not evolved but instead the people have been confused in order to be manipulated. They want America to become a Democracy
@@Lecreaplay Both concepts are paralel, A democratic republic is when the people have a say in the rules, or atleast in the composition of the system that makes the rules, which is what the U.S has been doing for 200 years.
@@alessandrobarallo3368 What is the definition of a republic?
What is the definition of a democracy?
@@Lecreaplay The definition of a Republic is a state that works under a set of laws, an estructured governing entity. A democracy, in the sense that most people mean, is where the people of a nation have a say/power on the government, a direct democracy is where citizen vote is absolute, but that system is not used, the modern democracy is a representative one, in the case of the U.S, 2 of the 3 branches of government have democratic elements, the president is elected by representatives from the electoral college, which are apointed by popular vote, the congress representatives are also chosen democratically.
@@Lecreaplay a democratic republic is when you have a state that uses a framework that relies on a big part on the vote of the people. Such as the U.S
In a republic, Head of the state is elected by the people and in monarchical system it is hereditary. E.g. In U.S. President is elected by the people and in Britain, their head of state is hereditary. Republican and monarchical systems are two types of democracy and hence there cannot be distinction between republic and democracy. Republic is democracy first and then rest of the things.
so who should i vote for?
The problem with pure democracy's is it discounts those that disagree. A republic protects the people from the ever changing will of the majority. It allows representation for those with differing opinions instead of expediting what most want.
What is this bullshit "pure democracy" or "extreme democracy" that people keep spitting out of their mouths?
It doesn't matter how impure a democracy, it is still a government where the people directly vote on laws.
The second you adopt representatives you are not a democracy in any form.
FordGTGuy
Quintin Preciado in the early days of the U.S some people made an article (dont remember the name) too convince more people for the U.S constitution and one article says stating that majority rule is would not be good and the will of the minority should be protected,
People in the government*
The USA is a Constitutional republic.
The more commonly used terms is presidential republic or federal republic, but you could also call it a federal constitutional presidential republic or a constitutional presidential federal republic (or whatever order of adjectives you prefer). Because they are all true for the US. The US is also a representative democracy of course, this video is stupid.
if anyone would like to watch more educational videos feel free to check out my "significant discussions" playlists
2:29, sound like someone was slapping a mosquito
No, it’s a representative democracy, known as a republic
Finally some here who makes some sense
This makes America sounds like communist China.
A governing system cannot be a representative democracy while keeping the title of Republic lol. They are two vastly differient systems. A pure Democracy leads every decision up to the majority of the population. What you are most likely describing is a Demoratic Democracy (or a representative if you want to be technical) which gives certain officials the power to elect others (a very unlimited process in terms of power if unchecked). This kind of Democracy gives more power to the federal governing bodies than to the local; making a big empty void for bribery to take place. A Representative Governing system or a Republic on the other hand makes the voting process less federal and more local giving local leaders the power to elect their higher ups and so on (meaning that this process repeats until it reaches the president). The population has more control over the voting process against corruption in this form of governing rather than a democracy (it is a bit confusing at first). Votes can be the target of fraud in some districts. To counteract this representatives are needed to vote their higherups in rather than the votes most targeted by fraud and corruption. It is a lot easier to coverup fraud and corruption on a nation-wide scale than it is with a single person in office or even a body of local leaders that elect their higher up/representative. That is the true differience between a democracy and a representative governing body or republic. Mix a constitution into there are it gets a whole lot more complicated. But I rest my case. More often than not countries that actually have democracies say that they are representative mostly because they do not know what a Republic is; a side affect of keeping the two definitions constantly changing both in the polical spectrum and the dictionary. I suggest you watch the series A Republic if you can keep it by Patriot Academy. I didn't learn this stuff from them but it is a good source if you want to learn more about how our government really works rather than what modern politics shows. It isn't free but that's the price for good material and learning information that is important for the rest of your life.
Democracy.Elections...The vote that changes nothing...
I am extremely confused. I thought republic was just a form of government as opposed to monarchy for example. And democracy was how the power was given (to the people). The UK is a representative democratic monarchy while the US is a representative democratic republic.
Am I wrong?
Yes you are wrong.
The United States is a republic, it's not a democratic republic or a representative democracy... it's a republic.
No where in our constitution does it say we are a democratic republic and no where did our founding fathers describe it as a democratic republic.
A republic, democracy and monarch are all separate forms of government.
The US *is* a democratic republic. It doesn't matter what the precise terms the drafters of the constitution used to describe it - "democratic" is an appropriate adjective given that the legislature and executive are elected. Moreover, the fact that amendments can be made to the constitution (with the approval of congress and state legislatures) is further evidence that ultimately the constitution relies on the consent of the governed for legitimacy.
Aedán Hamrock it is far leading liberal left that keeps referring to us as a democracy, because they believe in group rights not individual rights.
@Rory Mulligan OK O'Doyle and no, OP is not correct.
I would like to translate some of your videos to the Arabic Language but I can't, I don't find the option that allows me to do so, so please turn it on if you are interested.
"We are ruled by law, and a republic-- because WE SAID SO."
I think my karma just ran over your dogma.
Good one
"As citizens of this democracy, you are the rulers and the ruled, the lawgivers and the law-abiding, the beginning and the end." - Aldai Stevenson
mises.org/wire/stop-saying-were-republic-not-democracy
@Rory Mulligan
No, you're not.
@Rory Mulligan
The citizens of a republic are not the republic. The republic is it's own entity that grants its citizens rights (such as to vote) and binds them in other respects.
Just like a monarchy in that regard.
@Rory Mulligan
Not the government, but they're guaranteed by acts of law passed by the legislature.
If rights are not guaranteed, they might as well not exist.
The one in Greece was direct democracy what America has just like every other Democratic country today it's called representative democracy because you elect a representative rather than everyone voting because you cant actually get 300 million to vote on bills that are passed daily because people have other work to do. So I believe you are wrong because it is a still a democracy but not direct rather it's representative.
Not a democracy. Pay attention next time.
Umm, no, a Democracy is where the average person votes on laws that affect THAT AVERAGE person's life. So, if we did an indirect democracy it would be the passing of opinions from 300 million to 1000 people, who don't use there own views but rather the majority views of the represented state/area. So they would be average guys that are chosen to represent. Rather than the rich guys.
Because the USA is an OLIGARCHY. Not a republic, where anyone can run for office, because you have to be a rich guy to do anything with government.
The core of a republic is not representative democracy, it is a core constitution, non-negotiable that cannot be altered by majority vote nor representatives. So you can have direct democracy with majority vote on any legislation within a republic. You're welcome.
Somehow this got added to my song playlist... wut.
Great video! Happy to see our Republic being represented
We’ve never been a democracy.
Well, this video is half right. Elected officials are the difference between a Direct Democracy and a Representative Democracy, not between a Democracy and a Republic. The second difference they pointed out is what really distinguishes a Democracy from a Republic; in a Democracy a simple majority can write the laws, potentially infringing on the rights of the minority; in a Republic, the rights of the minority are protected by supreme law that is out of reach by the simple majority, usually in the form of a constitution.
There is no such thing as representative democracy, that's an oxymoron.
A democracy(if any form) is where the people vote directly on laws and therefore no democracy can have representatives.
The second a democracy adopts representatives to vote on laws they are no longer democracies.
FordGTGuy Representative Democracy: Representative because representatives are the ones who make laws, and a Democracy because the people vote directly for those representatives. A Representative Democracy is totally a thing.
@@marcosbeni5875 That literally doesn't make them democracies.
Sweden laughs at American democracy.
The usa has never been a democracy.
“Democracy is the most vile form of government.”― James Madison
“Republic” and “democracy” are two words from different cultures, Latin and Greek, for the same concept.
The word “republic” come from the Latin “res publica” or “this public thing” for the system where the people vote on matters to decide instead of having it decided by a king.
The word “democracy” comes from the Greek “demos” and “kratos” which means “people” and “power”. Together it mean power by the people.
"As long as offices are open to all men and no constitutional rank is established, it is pure republicanism." - Alexander Hamilton
"No determinations are carried, it is true, in a simple representative democracy, but by consent of the majority or their representatives." - John Adams
mises.org/wire/stop-saying-were-republic-not-democracy
Tell that nonsense to Trumpy: "Democrats and the failed Washington establishment are trying to erase your votes, nullify the election and overthrow OUR DEMOCRACY. " (Trump, Dec. 10, 2019).*
@@DrSanity7777777 Nononononononono; a republic is a nation ruled by a gixed body of law that spares every individual in its people the wrath of any ruling class, be it a mob/majority, a coalition of plutocrats, an ideology, or God forbid, a royal family and its monarch. Though, when a republic gets involved, there can BE NO monarch.
@@TheRojo387 I suppose you're under the impression that Britain is not a crowned republic? Hitler loathed democracy as well.🤔
"The sense of the majority should prevail. However this kind of logical legerdemain will never counteract the plain suggestions of justice and common sense." - Alexander Hamilton (The Federalist No. 22)
mises.org/library/libertarian-case-monarchy
Yes America has been a democracy and still is all the way since the 1800s dummy
America is a REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY. Same as AUSTRALIA, CANADA the United Kingdom.
The Constitution of the United States
Article IV, Section 4 - Republican Government
The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican form of Government.
Strength Through Commitment So what. It is still a REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY. even though they represent the corporations, it is still a fake DEMOCRACY.
Borris Morris A representative Democracy? Really? You're trying to reinvent definitions of a single word by adding "representative" and trying to achieve the definition of a Republic.
Whether you understand the difference or not, there is one between a Republic and a Democracy. The difference being, when the mob wants to hang a man because his hands are covered in the blood of an innocent, they don't get to freely hang him. He undergoes a trial in the court of law, under the Supreme Law of this Land known as the Constitution. Therefore, a Republic we are, as the mob does NOT rule that or any other situation.
The simplest definition of a Democracy is PURE and UTTER rule by the people, the majority of the people in other words.
The simplest definition of a Republic is Rule of Law, regardless of what the mob wants at this time, we consult the law.
Tell me, if we are a Democracy, why haven't the masses been able to take my firearms away from me after all their, in vain, effort? The Left presents that the majority of Americans are for gun registration and even confiscation to keep citizens safe. Why haven't the masses been able to accomplish this? It's simple, the Constitutional Law, in this case the reason is specifically the 2nd Amendment, that we are bound by makes this an unlawful task. Proving, in this Country, Law is above the Mob.
You need to realize that you have been deceived. Our Constitution established this Nation as a Republic in the 1700's. The definition of a Republic has not changed, nor has the way this Country operates. So, we operate and achieve the same function of a Republic and always have, since the 1700's. Unless you can prove to me that our system now operates differently according to Law.... We are exactly what we always have been.
Borris Morris A Representative Democracy would mean nothing more than to allow the people we have chosen to represent us to break the law if the majority of them say that it is fair and okay to do so, in that particular circumstance.
Democracy is in fact the Rule of the Mob. An All-Powerful Mob, where Majority Rules Regardless of any statue Law in place.
A Republic is in fact a State in which Law Rules. Regardless of what the Mob wants, they must consult the Law for the standards upon which they may act. If they abuse the Law and allow the Mob to control the situation and actions, they are not part of a Democracy any more than they are Justified in their actions; they are criminals.
The definition you are trying to create is a Representative Republic. I don't feel that I should have to explain to everyone that we are a Representative Republic, when they should realize, we are represented without my doing so. We are a Republic, there is no getting around it. Definitions have not changed since the time of the Republic of Rome. You have simply failed to understand that the definition has not changed, and the mob does not rule.
Borris Morris well your not even a REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY, as majority never rule in any thing. majority don't elect a president, pas laws or anything. the minority do
Nope!
"Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
[ … ]
American industry is not free, as once it was free; American enterprise is not free; the man with only a little capital is finding it harder to get into the field, more and more impossible to compete with the big fellow. Why? Because the laws of this country do not prevent the strong from crushing the weak. That is the reason, and because the strong have crushed the weak the strong dominate the industry and the economic life of this country.
[ … ]
The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy.
[ … ]
We have, not one or two, but many, fields of endeavor into which it is difficult, if not impossible, for the independent man to enter. We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world - no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men."
- Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom (1912)
Oh, the George Soros lizard people theory. Yawn yawn,
lol dude at forst glance I thought your username was Noam Chomsky
America isn't a democracy nor a republic it is an OLIGARCHY. An OLIGARCHY is the rule of the 1%.
I think a republic/oligarchy is the worst. All republics are Oligarchies. A democracy is the Rule of the people who know what is actually going on instead of wanting more money like the average politician.
***** No, I don't believe the majority of people know what is going on. And that's a bad thing. People can be taken in by propaganda, and people are.
Libertarianism will get rid of the corporations and socialism. Corporations lobby with government, because of this, it is not capitalism. Capitalism will get business out of government and vice versa. We believe in restoring the power of the constitutional republic, but we need to get the politicians to follow it again.
Libertarianism will eventually fall into corporations. It's inevitable.
Capitalism breaks down beyond the local level.
Fuck off Russian web-brigades!
It already has, The banking corporations already pretty much own every country by debt. The ones they dont own they bully with the countries they do. Example being AMERICA. We have more military bases and more black ops then any other country in the world. We are the headless hand of the bank
Actually America is a mixture of several different governmental processes. The continental congress took the best of the many different forms of government and formed what is a constitutional republic. I learned all of that before I was in the 10th grade. Schools today aren't schools, they are indoctrination facilities. The best thing that could happen to this country is the education of our children be accomplished by the parents and not the government.
Then why or what is it when we the people vote on bills?
The video is based about a wrong idea that people were referring to a direct democracy.
Note that people are talking about a representative democracy. And the US falls under it's system since it democraticly elected leglastive while also having a rule of law that protects the minority. It is false to say that a republic is just the rule the rule of law since that would mean that the country won't be run or new laws will be voted upon. It is the balance of those 2 principles (representative democracy and rule of law) that makes what the US government is. Especially since a republic can take a lot of forms.
Nice video. But tbh not even the ancient Greeks had true democracy since they only allowed a group of people to vote which in some way makes it the same as a republic. Everyone needs to have the same voting rights in a true democracy.
john you dont seem so happy with the answer of what we are...what do you like America to be Democracy or Republic? i wanna know your opinion since youur voice was a little on the disagreement side in the video. Thanks love ya!
very good videos, great job guys.. what about video for "Darwin Theory" of man was originally monkey; if it is true or not.. it will be great one :) thanks for just great videos
Well, it's not that man was originally apes... it's that our ancestors were. Or that we share a common ancestor with apes.
Yo when I saw that outro, I was like wait...is this the Bible project...? haha
"A representative democracy, or republic, is a government that is run indirectly by the people. This means that the people elect representatives to make decisions for them. We can call the United States a representative democracy or republic." - My US Goverment class public school. Maybe it is not a democracy, but it is a representative democracy, or republic.
america has a 2 party system which can’t be called a democracy. for a country to have true representative democracy needs to have varied parties that honour their duty to the people. american politicians listen more to the top 10% than they do to the working class 90%. that is a clear sign of representative politicians not fulfilling their duties.
Democracy: a pack of wolves and a flock of sheep deciding what is for dinner.
Larry Smith. That's "democracy is two wolves and one sheep deciding what's for dinner."
All the people wouldnt go to vote in ancient greece just citizens who were men and met a certain wealth requirement. A democracy is also the rule of law, just by majority. A republic in its pure form is probably the only way to have a functional democracy with 100s of millions of voters versus tens of thousands. The real problem is that we dont have a true republic in many senses, such as the influence of corporate donors or the electoral college.
By definition democracy is a government for the people by the people and controlled by the people. They elect the officials. This is a democracy, even if you are electing officials to work for you. US form of democracy is an indirect form of democracy.