democracy vs. republicanism

[Zyrael 1,471]

democracy: control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.

 
republic: a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.

 

 

in a democracy, the people hold direct power. That is, the country is governed by a "majority vote". In a republic, power is concentrated in elected officials and representatives. 

 

The modern U.S. has aspects of both, and both have their issues:

A democracy can fall victim to "the tyranny of the majority" whereas a republic can fall victim to corruption/bureaucracy and the powerful few ruling over the powerless many. 

 

So the question ultimately is, which do you prefer? 

Edited January 12, 2017 by Zyrael

[Beany Nug 7]

To be honest, I prefer Fascism over the two stated in the thread

[BigManAinsley 32]

Neither, not a fan of states being a Libertarian Capitalist. Would rather neither but Libertarianism isn't too popular as a major political faction

[cmarston1 5,959]

Given how morally bankrupt the Republican GOP, is and how it doesn't care for the people, especially given the attempts to destroy healthcare, I can't say I want to be anywhere in a Republic.

[BigManAinsley 32]

Given how morally bankrupt the Republican GOP, is and how it doesn't care for the people, especially given the attempts to destroy healthcare, I can't say I want to be anywhere in a Republic.

"Destroy healthcare" Obamacare is a joke lol

[Hazard Time 1,127]

In both systems, you have a rule by majority; in a democracy, the majority straight up rule, while in a republic, the majority elect those who best represent their values and interests.

 

Tbh, I'd rather be in a republic simply because it's a much more efficient system given that the population of America is almost 320 million people.  It's hard enough trying to get 535 congressmen and women to agree on one thing, a total democracy would only over-complicate matters and lead to chaos.

[DubWolf 17,433]

Given how morally bankrupt the Republican GOP, is and how it doesn't care for the people, especially given the attempts to destroy healthcare, I can't say I want to be anywhere in a Republic.

Actually the OP isn't about whether liberal or conservative is better, but whether it's better for each person to have an equal say in the matter, /directly/, as opposed to having representatives.. Represent you. Rather than everyone voting on a matter, officials we elect /should/ do it for us.

 

I believe I said it right .

[Denim&Venöm 19,533]

Out of those two, republic. 

 

Let's be blunt. Democracy is power to the people, and people are idiots. Not only is there the tyrannical rule of the majority, but also a vast number of uninformed, easily swayed voters. Not everyone is well informed, nor do they get the nuances or issues handled by those elected by representative process.  

 

Straight up democracy can unfortunately lead to referendums, which ironically highlight the flaws of the democratic process.

 

For example:

 

In a direct democracy, everyone has a voice. But not everyone's voice will be heard, and those that are, may not know the right thing to say. 

[RiseofSpectrum 359]

The only state that ever was a direct democracy was the City-State of Athens. It failed spectacularly.

 

So, a republic any day.

Edited January 14, 2017 by RiseofSpectrum

[Lucky Bolt 35,088]

I'm neither left nor right (libertarian) but if I had to choose...I'd still go with republic on this one. 

Edited June 29, 2019 by Lucky Bolt

[Mini 454]

anarcho-capitalism is where it's at

[Here No Longer 5,279]

Libertarian Socialism is where it be at

 

Nonetheless, both democracies and republics are immensely flawed. Republics open the door for authoritarian dictatorships pretending to be for the people and pure democracy is anarchy, and you know how that goes. And democratic republic is a term that means almost literally NOTHING.