NationStates Jolt Archive

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

True

So?

Shouldn't you guys be off gorging yourselves on fried bird?

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

*sigh*

Another who doesn't understand the modern meaning of the word, and that there is nothing in the term "republic" that prevents a nation from being a democracy.

Not that the US is a particularly good democracy, its substandard election system regarded.

Eh, I just see people getting it mixed up all the time. Which kind of bothers me since the two systems can be pretty different.

And yeah, a couple of hours 'till the bird.

I mean, I understand that a Republic is technically an indirect Democracy, but the term implies that the people have more power than we actually do have.

honestly i don't know the distinction. i didn't know being a republic negated democratic status.


i say you're wrong.

i mean obviously it's gone to shit, but it's still nominally a democracy.

It's more of a democracy than a lot of other places.

Definition of republic: A state where sovereignty rests with the people or their representatives, rather than with a monarch or emperor; a country with no monarchy.

Republic and democracy are extremely similar, but one is a type of government and the other is a system of government. They are not the same thing, but most republics are democracies.

It's more of a democracy than a lot of other places.
Sure, more than Cuba, but that still isn't saying much.

Definition of republic: A state where sovereignty rests with the people or their representatives, rather than with a monarch or emperor; a country with no monarchy.

Republic and democracy are extremely similar, but one is a type of government and the other is a system of government. They are not the same thing, but most republics are democracies.

I'm getting the idea that I was mistaken, but I'm not sure I fully understand. So the US would be a Democratic Republic, then?

*sigh*

Another who doesn't understand the modern meaning of the word, and that there is nothing in the term "republic" that prevents a nation from being a democracy.

Not that the US is a particularly good democracy, its substandard election system regarded.

You annoy me with your "I'm smarter than you and here's how the world goes BS"

Really?

It is?

....I'm going to have to rethink a few things.



NO SHIT SHERLOCK


(And you didn't even manage to include "representative"...)

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

(if you want to get real technical, its actually a federal representative democracy. While this does entail a significant republican influence, the democratic process is nontheless a well established practice in the United States de facto, if not necessarily de jure.)

Go away, troll.
They didn't seem very troll like.

usa has a terrible election system. hard to explain. country cant work with only two parties competing.

Not that the US is a particularly good democracy, its substandard election system regarded.
What good is a republic if it isn't democratic. The electoral college is a farce.

I'm getting the idea that I was mistaken, but I'm not sure I fully understand. So the US would be a Democratic Republic, then?

German wiki says the US is a "presidential federal republic". Doesn't keep it from being democratic, though, which should be kinda obvious.

"Not that the US is a particularly good democracy, its substandard election system regarded."

Sounds like it to me...

No...it's stating a very valid point.

Maybe that counts as trolling for some people. Who knows...

No...it's stating a very valid point.

Maybe that counts as trolling for some people. Who knows...


No, he likes to make inflammatory remarks without meaning to engage in serious discussion. That's what I consider to be trolling.

"Not that the US is a particularly good democracy, its substandard election system regarded."

Sounds like it to me...

not to me though. you need to read up on your definitions. and grow some skin.

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

A few things:

1. No Shit. Lemme guess, you just learned this in your high school history class, and thought it would be news to everyone?

2.We're an indirect Democracy. Very indirect, but there is a bit there.

3. We are also a Republic(Which is different than indirect Democracy). Do you know what constitutes a Republic?

4. I'm a jackass.

No, he likes to make inflammatory remarks without meaning to engage in serious discussion. That's what I consider to be trolling.

It's hardly an inflammatory remark; it's taken as more or less correct by a lot of people around these parts.

No, he likes to make inflammatory remarks without meaning to engage in serious discussion. That's what I consider to be trolling.

1) It's inflammatory only because you consider it so, apparently. I don't think it was inflammatory, nor would the Americans I know.
I don't think there is a single newspaper in the US that has never run an editorial pointing out flaws in the electoral system.

2) How do you know that he didn't mean to "engage in serious discussion"? The first reply to his post was a "You annoy me", the second was your "Go away, troll".
I see, serious discussion indeed.

let's define democracy shall we: A democracy is a Government ran by the people. It literally means "rule by the people."

Now let's talk about the two forms of Democracy:

Direct Democracy-Which people rule themselves and vote on all major issues and there are no intermediaries or representatives


Represenative-In which people chose a body of represenatives to Govern them. And that is what the U.S. is we as a public chose senators and represenatives to Govern us.

Prior to becoming a nation you could say the U.S. was almost direct democracy. And as for Republic: A state or country that is led by people whose political power is based on principles that are not beyond the control of the people of that state or country.

No, he likes to make inflammatory remarks without meaning to engage in serious discussion. That's what I consider to be trolling.

well fass seems to pick his sparring partners carefully. anyone who can be as abrasive and articulate and informed as him generally gets a discussion. if you just throw accusations of trolling around you aren't going to get a rise. at least not in general.

or subjects of the british monarch and a colony;)

not to me though. you need to read up on your definitions. and grow some skin.

Aww... You hurt my feelings... :'(

Seriously, though, can we actually discuss the topic of the post? There are many forms of democracy, and I think anyone with a basic understanding of the American system will realize that it's a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. Actually, many small towns in the U.S. use direct voting at town meetings, so there are many different systems at work.

Seriously, though, can we actually discuss the topic of the post?
Not to keep flogging a dead horse - but you do know that you started this little "trolling" detour, right?

[/"trolling" detour]

Not to keep flogging a dead horse - but you do know that you started this little "trolling" detour, right?

[/"trolling" detour]

Oh my God, really? I had no idea! But you realize that I'm trying to get the discussion on the right track again, right?

I didn't just learn that the US was a Republic, but I mentioned because I saw so many people--mainly the ones who say it like: "i thnk teh us is demoracy"--which based on the context of how it was used mad me think that they were using the term to mean "direct democracy" which gives the people more power than we in the US actually have.

Part of the misunderstanding is that in my mind I've always connected the word Democracy to it's direct form and never to the indirect form.

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

Eh, I just see people getting it mixed up all the time. Which kind of bothers me since the two systems can be pretty different.

And yeah, a couple of hours 'till the bird.

I mean, I understand that a Republic is technically an indirect Democracy, but the term implies that the people have more power than we actually do have.

I'm getting the idea that I was mistaken, but I'm not sure I fully understand. So the US would be a Democratic Republic, then?
So just to clarify that I am correctly following the flow of your posts. You started the thread to tell off folks who are not clear on the difference, because that pushes your buttons, even though being unclear on the difference yourself, you're hardly in a position to judge whether or not someone else has gotten it mixed up, so probably are not sure if your button is, or is not being pushed? :confused:

Vadrouille, it seems to me that Fassigen has made a more meaningful contribution to the discussion than you have to date. If you really think that Fassigen is trolling, you can find the moderation forum by clicking on the 'Anything & Everything' link at the top of the page directly under the nationstates bannner. Rather than spamming this thread, perhaps you could take your concerns there. Of course the mods do not like their time being wasted, but for someone convinced enough of trolling to make multiple posts accusing someone of doing so, in a thread that has not yet reached 3 pages, clearly you wont believe you have anything to worry about on that count. Please stop hi-jacking and spamming this thread under the onus that someone else is not contributing to the discussion.

Aww... You hurt my feelings... :'(

Seriously, though, can we actually discuss the topic of the post? There are many forms of democracy, and I think anyone with a basic understanding of the American system will realize that it's a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. Actually, many small towns in the U.S. use direct voting at town meetings, so there are many different systems at work.

There is nothing to discuss. The term "no shit" has been thrown around this thread several times for a reason. We get someone every other month who things they are being original and creative while saying nothing even notable. In order to discuss something, there must be two sides. There isn't.

Are we a direct democracy? No. Nor is that a logical or feasable system in a nation of 300,000,000 people. We are a representative democracy. Sure, we may be a piss poor version of that (particularly at the executive and judicial levels), but we are still one

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

Beneath that button you'll find a zipper. Undo both and enjoy yourself. ;)

Vadrouille, it seems to me that Fassigen has made a more meaningful contribution to the discussion than you have to date.

Did I not say the following?

"There are many forms of democracy, and I think anyone with a basic understanding of the American system will realize that it's a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. Actually, many small towns in the U.S. use direct voting at town meetings, so there are many different systems at work."

Did I not say the following?

"There are many forms of democracy, and I think anyone with a basic understanding of the American system will realize that it's a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. Actually, many small towns in the U.S. use direct voting at town meetings, so there are many different systems at work."

sorry, that says nothing. you already branded yourself crying "troll".

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

It's a republic soon-to-be police state.

So just to clarify that I am correctly following the flow of your posts. You started the thread to tell off folks who are not clear on the difference, because that pushes your buttons, even though being unclear on the difference yourself, you're hardly in a position to judge whether or not someone else has gotten it mixed up, so probably are not sure if your is or is not being pushed? :confused:

If by that you mean that I meant to correct what I assumed was a huge misunderstanding only to have it blow up in my face because it turned out I was the one under the misunderstanding because I forgot that a Republic was also called an indirect democracy therefore making them right... then yes. That's exactly what happened. :p

sorry, that says nothing. you already branded yourself crying "troll".

Oh well, I guess there's no turning over a new leaf in this forum. I apologize for my accusation, but I frequently see statements like that which are just left and never followed up on. To me, that's empty criticism, not constructive argument.

I didn't just learn that the US was a Republic, but I mentioned because I saw so many people--mainly the ones who say it like: "i thnk teh us is demoracy"--which based on the context of how it was used mad me think that they were using the term to mean "direct democracy" which gives the people more power than we in the US actually have.

Part of the misunderstanding is that in my mind I've always connected the word Democracy to it's direct form and never to the indirect form.

you need to start paying more attention to reality and less attention to books then. i can totally understand how unappealing that may be.

We're a democratic republic.

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

Congradulations. A Republic, a Democratic Republic. There's the whole "democracy" thing. I am sure that out of the 300 million of us that a bunch of us really don't like the confusion either but we're mostly political science people. No need to make a whole thread about it.

"Not that the US is a particularly good democracy, its substandard election system regarded."

Sounds like it to me...

Very low voter turnout in the United States is a well documented fact. Additionally, the relationship between single member plurality (so called "first past the post") electoral systems, as in the United States, and political systems dominated by only two political parties, is also well established. If democracy is concerned with representing the electorate in government, then the argument can be made that an electoral system that encourages success in only two major political parties, while any other parties struggle to exist, is harmful to democracy.

Such would be an assertion of a valid point, not trolling.

It's a republic soon-to-be police state.

xD

Oh well, I guess there's no turning over a new leaf in this forum. I apologize for my accusation, but I frequently see statements like that which are just left and never followed up on. To me, that's empty criticism, not constructive argument.


hey, you were wrong, so swallow it. fass' post was a provocation (if you don't know his post style, and simply fass if you do) and you took it the wrong way.

If by that you mean that I meant to correct what I assumed was a huge misunderstanding only to have it blow up in my face because it turned out I was the one under the misunderstanding because I forgot that a Republic was also called an indirect democracy therefore making them right... then yes. That's exactly what happened. :p

Oh well, I guess there's no turning over a new leaf in this forum. I apologize for my accusation, but I frequently see statements like that which are just left and never followed up on. To me, that's empty criticism, not constructive argument.

Why, is it the sweetening spirit of the holidays I feel wafting through the forums?

Group hug!

:p :)

Very low voter turnout in the United States is a well documented fact. Additionally, the relationship between single member plurality (so called "first past the post") electoral systems, as in the United States, and political systems dominated by only two political parties, is also well established. If democracy is concerned with representing the electorate in government, then the argument can be made that an electoral system that encourages success in only two major political parties, while any other parties struggle to exist, is harmful to democracy.

Such would be an assertion of a valid point, not trolling.

Thank you for your astute observation. I've apologized and deleted the post. Neeext!

but most republics are democracies.

Not even close.

The vast majority of republics, (currently and historically), have been/are run by tyrants with little democracy at all. Napoleon Boneparte's France was a republic, Josef Stalin's Russia was a republic, Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a republic, Kim Jong-il's Korea is a republic, Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe is a republic, and so on ad infinitum. Granted since the end of the Cold War there are a lot of republics with emerging democracies, but a lot of these democracies are feeble at best.

In an ironic turn of events you are now, on average, more likely to find a monarchy that cares for and listens to its people than you are to find a republic that does the same.

hey, you were wrong, so swallow it. fass' post was a provocation (if you don't know his post style, and simply fass if you do) and you took it the wrong way.

Hey, hon, you're right, I was wrong and I swallowed it. Lighten up, Francis! :)

let's define democracy shall we: A democracy is a Government ran by the people. It literally means "rule by the people."

Now let's talk about the two forms of Democracy:

Direct Democracy-Which people rule themselves and vote on all major issues and there are no intermediaries or representatives


Represenative-In which people chose a body of represenatives to Govern them. And that is what the U.S. is we as a public chose senators and represenatives to Govern us.

Prior to becoming a nation you could say the U.S. was almost direct democracy. And as for Republic: A state or country that is led by people whose political power is based on principles that are not beyond the control of the people of that state or country.

What's a government run by corporations called? The way I see it, Wal-Mart & Exxon/Mobil run this country, not the people!!!

Hey, hon, you're right, I was wrong and I swallowed it. Lighten up, Francis! :)

i'm lighter'n air, just a bit drunk :p

If by that you mean that I meant to correct what I assumed was a huge misunderstanding only to have it blow up in my face because it turned out I was the one under the misunderstanding because I forgot that a Republic was also called an indirect democracy therefore making them right... then yes. That's exactly what happened. :p
Fair enough Sylvontis. Everyone makes mistakes, but not everyone admits their mistakes readily so kudos to you.:D

Have yourself a virtual cookie.

Not even close.

The vast majority of republics, (currently and historically), have been/are run by tyrants with little democracy at all. Napoleon Boneparte's France was a republic, Josef Stalin's Russia was a republic, Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a republic, Kim Jong-il's Korea is a republic, Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe is a republic, and so on ad infinitum. Granted since the end of the Cold War there are a lot of republics with emerging democracies, but a lot of these democracies are feeble at best.

In an ironic turn of events you are now, on average, more likely to find a monarchy that cares for and listens to its people than you are to find a republic that does the same.

Interestingly, the leaders of a republic are theoretically obligated to answer to the people, that is, a republic is based on the government having the consent of the governed. You'd think that would be a natural stepping-stone to a democratic system, because the people would want their voices heard.

Interestingly, the leaders of a republic are theoretically obligated to answer to the people, that is, a republic is based on the government having the consent of the governed. You'd think that would be a natural stepping-stone to a democratic system, because the people would want their voices heard.

Theoretically.

Umm, I see things argued for me and retractions already made by the other side.

How peculiar.

*lets sleeping dogs lie, goes to wake bear elsewhere*

Umm, I see things argued for me and retractions already made by the other side.

How peculiar.
Not to suggest a conspiracy is afoot, but it does appear to be an effective way to shut you out of the conversation. :p

*Hands Fass a stick*, "You could try poking the bear awake".

Not to suggest a conspiracy is afoot, but it does appear to be an effective way to shut you out of the conversation. :p

I'm not complaining.

*Hands Fass a stick*, "You could try poking the bear awake".

*doesn't need sticks to poke with*

Interestingly, the leaders of a republic are theoretically obligated to answer to the people, that is, a republic is based on the government having the consent of the governed. You'd think that would be a natural stepping-stone to a democratic system, because the people would want their voices heard.

Yeah, well, if theories were horses we'd all be eating steak...

The fact is that in much of the world the modern republic is anti-traditional. If we look at the Banana Republics of the world it can be seen that before the colonial age there was some slow movement towards consentual tribal government. But the thrusting of the republican model onto these nations instead only encouraged greedy kleptocrats to rush towards the power of the state.

There is something to be said for the role of tradition in political culture, established conventions determine what it is proper for the president (or other head of state) to do and not do. Hell, the entirety of the British Constitution is based on the assumption that no Prime Minister should act dictatorially simply out of respect of tradition. By deliberately removing these traditions from post-colonial nations there is no societal force stopping a power-hungry individual from assuming complete power.

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

And water is wet!

I'm not complaining.



*doesn't need sticks to poke with*
so you're gonna use your fingers, I take it?

And water is wet!
And there's water at the bottom of the ocean. *nods*

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

*speaking in british accent*
You sir, are a bloody flippin idiot!
*bonks*

Errmm... aren't you guys a democratic republic? :confused:

Errmm... aren't you guys a democratic republic? :confused:

We wish. :p

while IMO the usa fails at democracy because of the two-party system, a democracy is a type of republic, which makes your argument complete bullshit.

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

Teh USA iz 2 a Dmockrassy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111!!11 u jus hate freedum!!!11 :mp5:



Everyone knows that, thank you.

Errmm... aren't you guys a democratic republic? :confused:

In the sense that we are now slaves to a Democrat Congress and a Republican President.......... yes. :rolleyes:

IMO, the USA is a two-party system, it does not count as a republic or a democracy.

In the sense that we are now slaves to a Democrat Congress and a Republican President.......... yes. :rolleyes:

IMO, the USA is a two-party system, it does not count as a republic or a democracy.

Um...what? In what sense at all is a two party system inherently anti democratic? It may be somewhat non proportional, but it's certainly the definition of a republic.

The representatives WERE voted in, were they not?

*doesn't need sticks to poke with*
Which is why we all admire and/or envy and/or covet you (and you thought it was your sparkling personality....)

Although while we are on the subject, are you sure it's a good idea to put that in a bear's face or within claw reach for that matter?

The word I was looking for; that best describes the United States government is...Corporatocracy!!! The following quotes, in my opinion, sum it all up quite accurately!

"The country is governed for the richest, for the corporation, the bankers, the land speculators, and for the expoiters." ~Helen Keller

"For most of the history of the American empire, government has been a tool for preserving and furthering the power and might of white male corporate elites." ~Cornel West

"While free markets tend to democratize a society, unfettered capitalism leads invariably to corporate control of government." ~Robert Kennedy. Jr.

It is the professed goal [of U.S. multinational corporations] to control as large a share of the world market as they do of the United States market." ~Harry Magdoff

Seriously, folks. It's a goddamn Republic!

Sorry, just one of my buttons there.

QFT.

Sure, you have more right to vote than Cuba, but that still isn't saying much.



um please, this is one area where you're completely wrong about america. we vote usually 2 or more times a year. England only votes every 5 years. America elects 20,000 people every election. TWENTY THOUSAND. no country even holds a candle to that. we have a perfect blend of national government and state and local government. when it comes to democracy no country compares the US. you may not like the government we elect, but we are the votingest country which has ever existed. its one of those little effects of a constitutional republic run by a federalist constitution, (federalism...another thing that is almost completely unique to the united states.)

The word I was looking for; that best describes the United States government is...Corporatocracy!!! The following quotes, in my opinion, sum it all up quite accurately!

"The country is governed for the richest, for the corporation, the bankers, the land speculators, and for the expoiters." ~Helen Keller

"For most of the history of the American empire, government has been a tool for preserving and furthering the power and might of white male corporate elites." ~Cornel West

"While free markets tend to democratize a society, unfettered capitalism leads invariably to corporate control of government." ~Robert Kennedy. Jr.

It is the professed goal [of U.S. multinational corporations] to control as large a share of the world market as they do of the United States market." ~Harry Magdoff



amazing...all of those people seem to be known for being outspoken liberals. except for helen keller. seems a little...bias...no?

Teh USA iz 2 a Dmockrassy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111!!11 u jus hate freedum!!!11 :mp5:



Everyone knows that, thank you.


wow...your kind of a fag.

(federalism...another thing that is almost completely unique to the united states.)

If you don't count Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, and Switzerland

wow...your kind of a fag.

That's a woman.

That's a woman.

He might not have much experience with the idea of two genders.