|
FAO: American Citizens (and everybody else who's interested) (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| R.j. |
Jeez, I'm not insinuating that we should start a revolution. As my post said, "it's useful" information to listen to.
The only reason I even posted that link is because we're going over the Constitution in our Government class, and a lot of what my professor says is a lot of what this guy says. And I know, for a fact, that my professor isn't a Libertarian.
But whatever. |
|
|
| R.j. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
No, we have a representational democracy, which is a form of republicanism. |
I think you mean representative republic. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| Its not useful, its probably total tripe by a ing wingnut. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by R.j.
I think you mean representative republic. |
No. I don't. |
|
|
| R.j. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
No. I don't. |
Prove me wrong. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
If you want it out in full terms the United States is a Constitutional Republic Representative Democracy.
Democracy in its traditional meaning means a government controlled directly by the people. Our founding fathers found this idea to be impractical due to the time it would take to hold elections on everything, especially given the speed of communications in the late 1700s.
Republicanism is the idea of a government that has an executive branch of power that is not a monarchy and that the members of that branch are elected by the people.
The terms are used together, but the correct term, at least according the Madison's interpretation of it is Representational Democracy of a Constitutional Republic. This means the public elects others to represent them in a branch of government as well as they elect their head of state.
This is different compared to a lot of other nations, mainly ones that are Constitutional Monarchies like the UK, its common wealth nations, and Japan. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
Its technically impossible in the US for government to go “beyond the pales of constitutionality.” If someone has a problem with the role or policy of the legislature, they can challenge it in the supreme court. If the SC agree they might strike down a law as unconstitutional, and if they disagree, they will uphold the right of the government to make the law.
Either way, the outcome means that the government have not gone beyond what is constitutional.
If anything, the recent SC decision should illustrate that the potential for going beyond what the constitution says is held much more closely by the judiciary, than the elected politicians. |
|
|
| idoru |
| quote: | Originally posted by R.j.
The only reason I even posted that link is because we're going over the Constitution in our Government class, and a lot of what my professor says is a lot of what this guy says. And I know, for a fact, that my professor isn't a Libertarian.
But whatever. |
Is your professor preaching or teaching? |
|
|
| R.j. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
If you want it out in full terms the United States is a Constitutional Republic Representative Democracy.
|
Okay. I'll agree to some extent. But do you believe that all rights are derived from property? |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by R.j.
Okay. I'll agree to some extent. But do you believe that all rights are derived from property? |
No, and there is nothing to agree or disagree with me about on what the US system of governance is. Its what the US system of government is classified as. Its not up for debate, and it hasn't been since the constitution was signed in 1787... :wtf: |
|
|
| R.j. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
No, and there is nothing to agree or disagree with me about on what the US system of governance is. Its what the US system of government is classified as. Its not up for debate, and it hasn't been since the constitution was signed in 1787... :wtf: |
You honestly don't believe that rights are derived from property? Then where do they come from? |
|
|
|
|
