Why is a Constitutional Republic more proper than a democracy?

Libhater said:
I've been saying that America is seen and known as being a Constitutional Republic for some time now.
It certainly is in line with what our founders agreed upon, and that we/America is in no way to be
considered a democracy, or a socialist run democracy.

Click to expand...
The leftist twats don't care. They use the term "democracy" not because it means anything to them or they care about it, but because they think it disparages trump and his supporters. Remember words have "fluid" meanings with leftists. They don't care that America isnt a democracy. They hate America and would hate it all the more if it actually was a democracy.
 
Given it's current size and greatly expanded numbers of states and geography, the U.S. should probably do away with the 'winner take all' practices re the electoral college votes of many states, allow more Parties to form, and implement proportional representation, at the least. The two party monopoly is so corrupted and dysfunctional it is destroying the country. There is no method of limiting the power of either, even by voting, especially once the oligarchy implements such farces as the 'super-delegate rule' and other dishonest garbage. Doing away with the electoral college would be even better.

As a counter-balance voters should be required to pass literacy and civics tests. The latter could be divided up among local, state, and Federal tests, and voting privileges assigned to each category separately, for those who are only interested in, say , national policy and have no interest in local politics, for example. The time is long past not doing so; the Civil Rights Acts and Voting Rights Acts and integrated schools and universities have been in place for a long time now need to be sunsetted, as was originally intended.
 
Last edited:
EdwinA said:
Given it's current size and greatly expanded numbers of states and geography, the U.S. should probably do away with the 'winner take all' practices of many states, allow more Parties to form, and implement proportional representation, at the least. The two party monopoly is so corrupted and dysfunctional it is destroying the country.
Click to expand...

You should start an initiative in your state,
 
Hume said:
So you have idea what she said.
Click to expand...

What she said about what?

The "Money" speech in "Atlas Shrugged" is the single most important essay on the nature of markets in history.

{“To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss–the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery–that you must offer them values, not wounds–that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men’s stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best that your money can find.}
www.capitalismmagazine.com

"Francisco's Money Speech" by Ayn Rand | Capitalism Magazine

"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Anconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money?"
www.capitalismmagazine.com www.capitalismmagazine.com
 
Libhater said:
I've been saying that America is seen and known as being a Constitutional Republic for some time now.
It certainly is in line with what our founders agreed upon, and that we/America is in no way to be
considered a democracy, or a socialist run democracy.

Click to expand...
Democracy simply means that we are not a dictatorship. Republic means that we are not a monarchy. A modern Republilc is a form of government in which the head of state is a President.

There are Democratic Monarchies like the UK or Norway. There are Republcs that are not democratic: North Korea, China, ....

The modern concept of "democracy" was created by.... US. The U.S. and France were the main models for what is understood today by the term "Democracy"
 
Feynman Lives! said:
Democracy simply means that we are not a dictatorship. Republic means that we are not a monarchy. A modern Republilc is a form of government in which the head of state is a President.

There are Democratic Monarchies like the UK or Norway. There are Republcs that are not democratic: North Korea, China, ....

The modern concept of "democracy" was created by.... US. The U.S. and France were the main models for what is understood today by the term "Democracy"
Click to expand...

Wow, insanely ignorant...
 
Libhater said:
I've been saying that America is seen and known as being a Constitutional Republic for some time now.
It certainly is in line with what our founders agreed upon, and that we/America is in no way to be
considered a democracy, or a socialist run democracy.

Click to expand...

You takin' your advice from Ayn Rand??? LOL. Are you in junior high?

Ayn Rand was one of the most repulsive thinkers in the last century. Her philosophy of unrestrained personal aggrandizement and he theology of the "disaffected supergenius" is disgusting at all levels.

The BEST PART: As she neared her death from cancer she actually utilized social safety net help. LOL. That's literally all you need to know about how morally bankrupt she was.
 
EdwinA said:
And you in yours.
Click to expand...

This is a federation of independent states. While you should do what you can to mold your state to your views, you have no right to try and alter the structure of other states.

My state - California - has an initiative process - but it means nothing as the Oligarchy simply overrides the will of the people when they choose.
 
Obtenebrator said:
You takin' your advice from Ayn Rand??? LOL. Are you in junior high?
Click to expand...

What?

Obtenebrator said:
Ayn Rand was one of the most repulsive thinkers in the last century. Her philosophy of unrestrained personal aggrandizement and he theology of the "disaffected supergenius" is disgusting at all levels.
Click to expand...

ROFL

A Marxist attacking what you don't understand.

Obtenebrator said:
The BEST PART: As she neared her death from cancer she actually utilized social safety net help. LOL. That's literally all you need to know about how morally bankrupt she was.
Click to expand...

Oh wow, the big lie...

Just because that was debunked 50 years ago is no reason to stop telling that lie. I mean, Rand destroyed Communism from a moral and ethical perspective.

You can't defend your positions, so you have no choice but to slander and defame your betters.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Just because that was debunked 50 years ago is no reason to stop telling that lie. I mean, Rand destroyed Communism from a moral and ethical perspective.

You can't defend your positions, so you have no choice but to slander and defame your betters.
Click to expand...

Yeah apparently she did take social security, if her secretary Cynthia Peikoff is to be believed, and in 2010 a journalist using FOIA found that there's a record in the SS offices of Ayn receiving $11,000 from Social Security. And her husband collected SS benefits until his death.

BTW, social security, according to the Ayn Rand Institute is a form of welfare: "In fact, Social Security is not insurance. It merely seizes income from working Americans and dispenses it to retirees, with a vague (but legally unenforceable) assurance that younger Americans will someday get to reach into the pockets of their kids and grandkids. We shouldn’t hide that fact with euphemisms. “Contributions” should be called “taxes.” “Benefits” should be called “handouts.” Social Security shouldn’t be described as “social insurance” but as welfare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top