NYCPHP Meetup

[David Krings]

Kristina Anderson wrote:
> As originally conceived, the United States of America was not 
> a "democracy" but a "Constitutional republic".   School kids today are 
> taught that these two things are the same, but in fact, they are not.

Not only that, figures of the public always tout the USA as "the biggest 
democracy in the world" and ongoing foreign policy is to spread democracy to 
the world. How can that be when the USA is not even a democracy itself??
Besides that, nations like France, Germany and many others are republics, but 
also are democracies defined by their constitutions. I think that "republic" 
is a state form, whereas "democracy" is the form of government. Look at Great 
Britain, Australia, or Canada, they have the state form of monarchy, but are 
also democracies. That said, I don't think that a democarcy cannot be a 
republic, or better to say just because the USA is a republic it is not a 
democracy. Furthermore, the USA is more a federation of states, which makes a 
difference as the states here have way more autonomy and independence than for 
example the states of Germany or the regions and departments in France.


> In a Constitutional Republic, the popular vote, or any executive of 
> any governmental branch alone, cannot supersede the Constitution and 
> the rights granted therein.  Only an Amendment to the Constitution can 
> have this power, and that was never something that was meant to 
> be "voted on" in a "general democratic election" where 51% of people 
> could exercise a "tyranny of the majority" over the other hapless 
> 49%.  

That is a convention, but not a mandate. The majority of people can still 
produce a change to the constitution by electing the members of parliament. 
And directly voting over any law is not what defines a democracy, although I 
cannot think of any place other than the USA and its states where popular vote 
is often used for deciding what becomes law or not. Just look at the many 
ballot measures that are added in local, regional, and state elections. 
Everyone votes about gay and women rights, a yes or no about offshore 
drilling, and many other measures and laws.
In regards to the tryranny, I rather have a tyranny of a majority than a 
tyranny of select few. Besides that, the vast majority of elections in the USA 
are popular votes. I think there is no EC process for any public office other 
than that of the president.



> [I, personally, would not feel at all comfortable living in a 
> true "democracy" where at least 80% of the population were, by any 
> standards, borderline illiterate and completely uninformed about 
> reality.  The governmental form we now have, which is essentially an 
> oligarchy where the "globalists" dictate policy and we have this farce 
> of a "two party system" we can "vote for", at least has the benefit of 
> being completely unaffected by the "popular vote".]

I agree with the facts put forward, but draw different conclusions. The poeple 
are held dumb intentionally, because dumb people rather watch football or 
wrestling than to ask critical questions. IMHO the right conclusion would be 
to smarten up people not to dumb down the form of government that enables 
illiterate criminals to hold public office.
I think the two party system is a distinct weakness. Although there are the 
various fractions and wings within each party, if it comes down to it there is 
no "option C". It all gets reduced to a "with us or against us", which just 
doesn't work. Things are way too complex than to scale them down always to yes 
and no questions. Life is not binary.


> I belong to a hereditary historical/patriotic society and we are asked 
> to swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America -- 
> NOT the "elected government" of the United States of America, who 
> themselves, in the present day, are not upholding the Constitution and 
> the rights granted therein, and in fact from a strictly Constitutional 
> standpoint are probably illegitimate. 

So, now I need to ask the question that makes me wonder for years. Why the 
heck did that government then get re-elected?