Silverback wrote:
>But it is an abstraction in another sense. The Americans have an
>ideological tradition starting with some of the founders and kept alive by
>conservatives, libertarians and classical liberals, which made a specific
>point that the US was not a democracy, but a republic. By republic they
>meant the rule of law, constitutional law, that could not be overridden by
>the majority.
This is not true (which proves my point about the problem with people who
do not do research). According to the Federalist 10 (penned by James
Madison, a major contributor to our (yankees) Constitution and fourth
president --
A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of
representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the
cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies
from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure
and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.
The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are:
first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number
of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens,
and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.
They use "republic" to refer to a representative government. Note -- this
is (for them) a necessary but not sufficient definition of
"republic." They are comparing "republic" to "democracy" and thus
emphasize the difference. What they have in common, of course, is no monarch.
Be that as it may, Americans today use these words differently, as do
political scientists and political theorist (although no political theorist
to my knowledge defines "republic" as democracy+law. They call
democracy+law "liberal state" or "liberal democracy" (tho' I admit I am not
a political scientist, if there is one out there, perhaps she can confirm
or correct me)
He also says
> A third party who doesn't understand can often be an impetous to
> clearer explanations and understandings on their parts.
And I would again insist that the third party will not be able to suggest
alternatives unless s/he has done research.
You don't have to be an academic to do good research. But you just can't
write an encyclopedia without doing research.
Steve
Steven L. Rubenstein
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bentley Annex
Ohio University
Athens, Ohio 45701