We are NOT a Democracy

Tom · #1 (**permalink**) 03-28-2004, 03:26 PM

Quote:

"These United States Of America . . . Are Not a Democracy!"
by James Kraft-Lorenz

Introduction
The United States of America was founded as a federation of Republics whose sole purpose was to protect persons and their property. Without regulations, subsidies and other privileges, individuals and businesses co-evolved in a competitive environment to be the most inventive and efficient on earth. Democracy—rule by the majority; disregard for individual rights—has perverted what was once a symbiotic relationship among individuals and businesses into a parasitic relationship. Even our massive deficit spending can no longer hide our decline.

This nation was never intended to be a democracy. The framers and ratifiers meant to impose the stable rule of law and not the rule of men, motivated, at the instant, by whim and passion. Democracy is the antithesis of the rule of law, for it is precisely the rule of the voters: that is, rule without limits, obtaining its power from 50%, plus 1, regardless of the established law. Under demos (populace) kratos (master), from the Greek, the mere whim of the majority, right, wrong or indifferent, becomes the law. A lynch mob is democratic within this definition.

Look at the Internal Revenue Service or the DEA—do they not violate the Law guaranteed by the Bill of Rights? Aren't they a product of the legislative democracy, outside the rule of the ratified Law? Yes, but they are certainly democratic. The voters in the States elected the whole Congress. The majority in Congress voted to empower these agents beyond the powers given to Congress by the People. Both votes, the direct election of Senators and the Congress's vote to bestow powers they do not Lawfully have, are contra to the Constitution as Lawfully ratified.

Consensus facit legem is an incontrovertible rule of law which means 'consent makes law.' How does a minority in the right oppose a majority in the wrong, without resort to a fixed rule of law? It cannot. Without a republican form of government a peaceful defense of rights may not be possible.

In short, the operative word is republican. (Not to be confused with the modern Republican party.) Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution states: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence." A serious and potentially damaging bit of misinformation usually follows this line: "Our Treasured Basic Freedoms . . . the historical basic documents that laid the foundation for our democracy, etc." The author of this mistake is usually innocent. He or she is not aware of the real foundation of our federated government.

The closest American dictionary to the ratification period is Noah Webster's "An American Dictionary of the English Language," printed in 1828. Noah Webster says in part:

REPUB'LIC, n. [L. respublica; res and publica; public affairs.]
A commonwealth; a state in which the exercise of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person.
REPUBLICAN, a.
Pertaining to a republic; consisting of a commonwealth; as a republican constitution or government.
Seems pretty clear, for the then commonly understood definition of 'republican.'

The Declaration of Independence (the Primary statute), along with the Constitution (the Organic Law), as properly ratified, by two- thirds of the states' votes, is the total and perfect definition of the American republic. The only external interpretation is the intent of the framers and ratifiers.1

Our nation is, properly, a limited constitutional federal republic, formed of limited constitutional state republics, all using majority rule to fill certain elective offices and decide certain matters. With the ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the People reserved only four direct (majority) votes:

1. Direct election of Representatives to Congress;

2. Direct election of Presidential Electors;

3. Direct votes as Jurors;

4. Direct votes as Grand Jurors.

We are democratic to the extent of these direct votes of the People. Our government's model is republican in form.

See the rest at:
http://www.banned-books.com/truth-se..._3/ts213d.html

The funny thing about it is that many people don't even know our form of government.

I blame the teachers union, UmKay.

marybeth77 · #2 (**permalink**) 03-28-2004, 03:30 PM

That's sooo yesterday. So, I guess we should sit back and relax a bit. Our "representatives" know exactly what they're doing. I wish we could get back to the good ole days of indentured serrvitude. No more bills, at least. And we would have guaranteed housing.

mb

SenaxFlatulus · #3 (**permalink**) 03-28-2004, 03:38 PM

We've already discussed this in another thread, but that's okay.

Although I'm interested in how it's the teacher's union that's to blame. I mean, I'm no fan of the teacher's union, but I fail to see the correlation here. I'm one for assuming the responsibility for my actions. If I don't know something about my government it's my fault... not someone else's. It's in all the history books I've seen, and believe me... I've seen a lot.

EiregoSod · #4 (**permalink**) 03-28-2004, 04:04 PM

carefully how you word it!

The US is exporting expensive war to countries to promote 'democracy' within those countries!

jeep that in mind:

but continue on with the topic at hand

Tom · #5 (**permalink**) 03-29-2004, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenaxFlatulus";p=&quot

We've already discussed this in another thread, but that's okay.

Although I'm interested in how it's the teacher's union that's to blame. I mean, I'm no fan of the teacher's union, but I fail to see the correlation here. I'm one for assuming the responsibility for my actions. If I don't know something about my government it's my fault... not someone else's. It's in all the history books I've seen, and believe me... I've seen a lot.

Teachers union, teachers are teraching KIds that we are a democracy, (I know my child came home from school saying we ae a democracy) ever since the early '30's the government became more open to socialism, so when socialism came in, they encouraged people to see ourselves as a democracy and started teaching kids that. So to this day, the majority of us believe we are a democracy.

DBG · #6 (**permalink**) 03-30-2004, 01:21 AM

.........man I sure do get sick of explaining this to neo-cons - and I never have gotten a straight answer out of them as to what in bloody hell they "think" this differentiation means.

The words "democracy" and "republic" are NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.

Our country is owned by the people, as opposed to being owned by a dictator or royal family. If you look up the roots of the word 'republic' you will gain a better understanding of what the word means. Translated from the Latin the word means "thing of the PEOPLE".

This REPUBLIC we call the USA has a form of government called "representitive democracy", which means we elect representitives to vote in our place rather than vote on every single thing ourselves, which is called a "pure" or sometimes "direct" democracy.

IOW - The REPUBLIC called USA has a representitive decmocratic govenment.

Didn't they go through this in your CIVICS class fercrisakes? This is bare-bones basic chapter one stuff boys and girls.

I don't know why this falsehood seems to hold "deep" meaning for neo-cons but they throw it out with regularity.

For further EDUCATION stop reading neo-con propaganda and go to the durned dictionary, eh? www.m-w.com

SprintHawk · #7 (**permalink**) 03-30-2004, 10:30 AM

I guess I am not following this thread. The United States is a liberal democracy. This is the ideology. The form of government is that of a Republic -- that means we do business through a structure of representation. In other words we are a Republic known to be a representative democracy. The initiative process provides for the voter (citizen) direct access into law making process.

Now can whoever started this discussion help me understand the significance of the point you were making?

Breadfruit4u · #8 (**permalink**) 03-30-2004, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom";p=&quot

Quote:

"These United States Of America . . . Are Not a Democracy!"
by James Kraft-Lorenz

Introduction
The United States of America was founded as a federation of Republics whose sole purpose was to protect persons and their property. Without regulations, subsidies and other privileges, individuals and businesses co-evolved in a competitive environment to be the most inventive and efficient on earth. Democracy—rule by the majority; disregard for individual rights—has perverted what was once a symbiotic relationship among individuals and businesses into a parasitic relationship. Even our massive deficit spending can no longer hide our decline.

This nation was never intended to be a democracy. The framers and ratifiers meant to impose the stable rule of law and not the rule of men, motivated, at the instant, by whim and passion. Democracy is the antithesis of the rule of law, for it is precisely the rule of the voters: that is, rule without limits, obtaining its power from 50%, plus 1, regardless of the established law. Under demos (populace) kratos (master), from the Greek, the mere whim of the majority, right, wrong or indifferent, becomes the law. A lynch mob is democratic within this definition.

Look at the Internal Revenue Service or the DEA—do they not violate the Law guaranteed by the Bill of Rights? Aren't they a product of the legislative democracy, outside the rule of the ratified Law? Yes, but they are certainly democratic. The voters in the States elected the whole Congress. The majority in Congress voted to empower these agents beyond the powers given to Congress by the People. Both votes, the direct election of Senators and the Congress's vote to bestow powers they do not Lawfully have, are contra to the Constitution as Lawfully ratified.

Consensus facit legem is an incontrovertible rule of law which means 'consent makes law.' How does a minority in the right oppose a majority in the wrong, without resort to a fixed rule of law? It cannot. Without a republican form of government a peaceful defense of rights may not be possible.

In short, the operative word is republican. (Not to be confused with the modern Republican party.) Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution states: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence." A serious and potentially damaging bit of misinformation usually follows this line: "Our Treasured Basic Freedoms . . . the historical basic documents that laid the foundation for our democracy, etc." The author of this mistake is usually innocent. He or she is not aware of the real foundation of our federated government.

The closest American dictionary to the ratification period is Noah Webster's "An American Dictionary of the English Language," printed in 1828. Noah Webster says in part:

REPUB'LIC, n. [L. respublica; res and publica; public affairs.]
A commonwealth; a state in which the exercise of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person.
REPUBLICAN, a.
Pertaining to a republic; consisting of a commonwealth; as a republican constitution or government.
Seems pretty clear, for the then commonly understood definition of 'republican.'

The Declaration of Independence (the Primary statute), along with the Constitution (the Organic Law), as properly ratified, by two- thirds of the states' votes, is the total and perfect definition of the American republic. The only external interpretation is the intent of the framers and ratifiers.1

Our nation is, properly, a limited constitutional federal republic, formed of limited constitutional state republics, all using majority rule to fill certain elective offices and decide certain matters. With the ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the People reserved only four direct (majority) votes:

1. Direct election of Representatives to Congress;

2. Direct election of Presidential Electors;

3. Direct votes as Jurors;

4. Direct votes as Grand Jurors.

We are democratic to the extent of these direct votes of the People. Our government's model is republican in form.

See the rest at:
http://www.banned-books.com/truth-se..._3/ts213d.html

The funny thing about it is that many people don't even know our form of government.

I blame the teachers union, UmKay.

I have been saying this for a long time but some people it seems are unable to see it. The Government always talk about democracy and how good it is yet they have supported and propped up so many dictatorships around the world and have overthrown so many small democracies, simply because it was not in U.S. big business interest. It's the same reason why they kidnapped the president of Haiti. Because there are many U.S. companies in Haiti who are exploiting the people and Aristde raised the minimum wage to $1.00 U.S. since he came into office.

SenaxFlatulus · #9 (**permalink**) 03-30-2004, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Breadfruit4u";p=&quot

It's the same reason why they kidnapped the president of Haiti. Because there are many U.S. companies in Haiti who are exploiting the people and Aristde raised the minimum wage to $1.00 U.S. since he came into office.

Oh geez... who on earth told you that?

oddlycalm · #10 (**permalink**) 03-30-2004, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenaxFlatulus";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Breadfruit4u";p=&quot

It's the same reason why they kidnapped the president of Haiti. Because there are many U.S. companies in Haiti who are exploiting the people and Aristde raised the minimum wage to $1.00 U.S. since he came into office.

Oh geez... who on earth told you that?

Just a guess, but probably a fellow 16yr old for whom English is a second language.

oc

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode