Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 430563264288784405
>In American English, **the definition of a republic** refers specifically to a form of government in which elected individuals represent the citizen body[2] and exercise power according to the rule of law under a constitution, including separation of powers with an elected head of state, referred to as a constitutional republic[4][5][6][7] or **representative democracy**. [8]
***ELECTED*** officials
Elected by reps
so corporate state now?
Not directly elective
Hail Microsoft?
Hail GM?
The electoral college
Technically, the US could be set up so that the only voters eligible for federal elections are the mayors of towns.
not that I want that
It is still ldirectly democratic it's just that citizens votes are voting to choose the winning candidate for their state and then the states electoral vote is what counts.
If you want to go about splitting semantic hairs, please provide a clear definition of the disagreement, don't just say "you're wrong."
good thing anyone who suggests that would get lynched faster than a negro in the south
🎩
<:pepe_eyes:378719408362881024>
That's also only true of presidental elections
so does the majority of the united states decide
or is it weighted
State officials are voted for directly which in the long run is what matters more
hmmmmmmmmmm
i agree
And that sucks lol
and spread "freedom"
Do you have a practical alternative to democracy?
yes, dictatorship
That isn't based on a pre-determined goal based on personal opinions*
The key difference between a democracy and a republic lies in the limits placed on government by the law, which has implications for minority rights. Both forms of government tend to use a representational system — i.e., citizens vote to elect politicians to represent their interests and form the government. In a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a "pure democracy," the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority.
Most modern nations are democratic republics with a constitution, which can be amended by a popularly elected government. This comparison therefore contrasts the form of government in most countries today with a theoretical construct of a "pure democracy", mainly to highlight the features of a republic.
@radeon Also, you realize that in a stratocracy, career politicians wouldn't really exist
If everyone were just slaves to the state, no problems would exist
apart from the fact everyone would be a slave
so?
this has some good explanations but i do not totally agree
That's a really minor advantage versus the enormous disadvantage of denying rights to millions of people
The American constitution can have its amendments changed with enough votes, no?
what is with the strawmaning? @Deleted User
in the words of stratocracy "indentured servitude isn't morally wrong"
wut
And which don't they have?