Where? Athens or the US in the 18th c.? Either way both are correct as only males had the franchise, and in the both cases, citizenship was only awarded to males, however, the suffragette movement gave women the vote in the modern era and now all people of age are citizens and enjoy the franchise.
"And after briefly dipping his toes in the waters of reason, the man with no brain scampers off, to frolic on the shores of Insanity Beach" ~ Rik Mayall (RIP)
Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.
Captdon (07-05-2018)
I think the original definitions were off. I always thought a Democracy was a vote about everything. They were townhall like they still use in small towns in the NE. I thought a Republic was representative government and not direct.
Looks to me as an argument of definitions that were wrong to begin with.
Calling the US a democracy is a common way to say what we are although we aren't. We are a representative republic.
Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
Pick your enemies carefully.
MisterVeritis (07-10-2018),Peter1469 (07-05-2018)
No. Women couldn't vote but were citizens. The trouble was with naturalized women. They became citizens when they married a citizens.
https://www.archives.gov/publication...ization-1.html
This talks about naturalized women so obviously women born here were citizens without the right to vote or much else to be truthful.
Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
Pick your enemies carefully.
Definition #1 defines a rule of law simply derived by a majority vote of the people and a possible mob rule if a true democracy were even possible at any extended form aside from a small local government. Definition #2 makes room for representation governance sworn to abide by, preserve, protect and defend not the people, but the people's contractual guarantee of life, liberty, property, pursuit of happiness, rights, privileges and immunities.
Government is force by definition and corruption by nature. The Bigger the government the greater the force and the greater the corruption.
Just not seeing any difference. In a direct democracy, majority votes dominate minorities. In a representative democracy, a majority elect some representatives over minorities, and a representative majority dominates representative minorities.
A constitution makes no difference because a majority can change it.
Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler
what you're describing is a "representative" democracy. The true identifying principle is "representing" what/who. A Constitutional Republic defines "what" the representatives are sworn to represent, that being the "people's," (the who) guarantee of life, liberty, property, the pursuit of happiness, rights, privileges and immunities. The people's power only lies in their choice of who they believe will best represent not them personally, but rather represent their warrantee. i.e. guarantee, i.e. the Constitution.
Government is force by definition and corruption by nature. The Bigger the government the greater the force and the greater the corruption.
The term "representative democracy" is an oxymoron. Democracy is direct majority vote of the people. The word "Republic" in and of itself is truly ambiguious, however when proceeded by the word "Constitutional," it has total rational definition as a nation governed by a "RULE OF LAW."
Government is force by definition and corruption by nature. The Bigger the government the greater the force and the greater the corruption.
MisterVeritis (07-07-2018)