'The US is not a Democratic Republic but a Republican Democracy'

Author, Dick Howard explains Americans on the left 'think in term of the French' system that is 'socialism' while the US constitution preserve the democracy in the America. Yet he claims that the US democracy is at stake in the current political context.
Subscribe to France 24 now: f24.my/KZbinEN
FRANCE 24 live news stream: all the latest news 24/7
f24.my/YTliveEN
...
Visit our website: www.france24.com
Like us on Facebook: / france24.english
Follow us on Twitter: / france24_en

[@hunterslaptop2166]

No we are a Constitutional Republic with only a Democratic election system. Everyone is trying to remove the Republic name and replace it with Democracy, but we are rooted in Constitutional Republic. So stop making new names for it just because we adopted a election system from the democratic platform. The US is a Constitutional Republic. "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

[@hunterslaptop2166]

The Constitution is there not to protect Democracy, but to keep the republic government in check.

[@hunterslaptop2166]

Its when you become a Democracy aka MOB RULE, is when things get dangerous, because in mob rule in a democracy. The mob could technically make changes to the constitution, through silencing your voice and other tactics like you see and hear today.

[@matrixlone]

Exactly we aren't a democracy that is officially dead

[@herrnchaos25]

YOU CAN BE A DEMOCRACY AND A REPUBLIC LIKE GERMANY WE HAVE NO KING OR DICTATOR WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION A REPRESANTIVE DEMOCRACY AND WE ARE A REPUBLIC . THE WORD REPUBLIC IS JUST A WORD THAT THESE NATIONS ARE NOT RULED BY A DICTATOR OR MONARCH

[@herrnchaos25]

@@hunterslaptop2166 DEMOCRACY IS NOT MOB RULE , MONARCHS SAID THIS TO DISTRACT THE PUBLIC

[@nancyk6726]

Article IV, Section 4 US Constitution. The US is a Republican form of govt. The word democracy does not appear in the Constitution.

[@tta3881]

So true

[@mnguardianfan7128]

The people have a say in their government. All representatives are elected by majority rule (except for the President and VP). That is a (small d) democracy.

[@White-bn8wb]

@@mnguardianfan7128That is republic, electing representatives is not in the definition of democracy. It doesn’t even fit the meaning. Democracy means the people have control over making decisions and passing laws in government.

[@magicdolphin8436]

@@White-bn8wb Representative democracy not in your vocabulary or are you just dishonest?

[@magicdolphin8436]

​@@White-bn8wb Semantics, full stop. The constitution also says black people are 3/5ths of a person, it is not the arbitor of what is true. Constitutional Republic = Representative Democracy. They are the same thing

[@Mike-ne8eb]

"Representative democracy" was understood as a form of democracy, alongside "pure democracy": John Adams used the term "representative democracy" in 1794; so did Noah Webster in 1785; so did Sr. George Tucker in his 1803 edition of Blackstone; so did Thomas Jefferson in 1815. Tucker's Blackstone likewise uses "democracy" to describe a representative democracy, even when the qualifier "representative" is omitted. Likewise, James Wilson, one of the main drafters of the Constitution and one of the first Supreme Court justices, defended the Constitution in 1787 by speaking of the three forms of government being the "monarchical, aristocratical, and democratical," and said that in a democracy the sovereign power is "inherent in the people, and is either exercised by themselves or by their representatives." Chief Justice John Marshall-who helped lead the fight in the 1788 Virginia Convention for ratifying the U.S. Constitution-likewise defended the Constitution in that convention by describing it as implementing "democracy" (as opposed to "despotism"), and without the need to even add the qualifier "representative." Sir William Blackstone, who was much read and admired by the framers, likewise used "democracy" to include republics: "Baron Montesquieu lays it down, that luxury is necessary in monarchies, as in France; but ruinous to democracies, as in Holland. With regard therefore to England, whose government is compounded of both species, it may still be a dubious question, how far private luxury is a public evil …." Holland was of course a republic, and England was compounded of monarchy and government by elected representatives; Blackstone was thus labeling such government by elected representatives as a form of "democrac[y]." We're both federal constitutional representative democracy and a federal constitutional representative republic. "I conceive that the object of the discussion now before us is whether democracy or despotism be most eligible. I am sure that those who framed the system submitted to our investigation, and those who now support it, intend the establishment and security of the former. The supporters of the Constitution claim the title of being firm friends of the liberty and the rights of mankind. They say that they consider it as the best means of protecting liberty. We, sir, idolize democracy. Those who oppose it have bestowed eulogiums on monarchy. We prefer this system to any monarchy because we are convinced that it has a greater tendency to secure our liberty and promote our happiness. We admire it because we think it a well-regulated democracy: it is recommended to the good people of this country: they are, through us, to declare whether it be such a plan of government as will establish and secure their freedom. (John Marshall at the Constitutional Convention) "Of what description is the Constitution before us? In its principles, it is purely democratical: varying indeed in its form in order to admit all the advantages, and to exclude all the disadvantages which are incidental to the known and established constitutions of government. But when we take an extensive and accurate view of the streams of power that appear through this great and comprehensive plan … we shall be able to trace them to one great and noble source, THE PEOPLE…." (James Wilson, Supreme Court justice)

[@dariusblack2997]

Great information.

[@rydergoode6922]

Wrong!! It's a constitutional republic

[@mississippi-son]

The US is a constitutional republic

[@bravo075]

Hey, to everyone that searched this video, I recommend that in this day and age of misinformation you return to the basics and go to a library or search for unbiased keywords. Don't get caught up in the post-truth given to you by people who in the end just want to manipulate you for their own profit. Find the correct information and make your own decisions.

[@hiimpeyton671]

“It’s not a democratic republic, it’s a republican democracy” I’m not dead. I’m just not alive

[@emmittmatthews8636]

From White House . gov: 🤷‍♂️ "While often categorized as a democracy, the United States is more accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic. What does this mean? “Constitutional” refers to the fact that government in the United States is based on a Constitution which is the supreme law of the United States. The Constitution not only provides the framework for how the federal and state governments are structured, but also places significant limits on their powers. “Federal” means that there is both a national government and governments of the 50 states. A “republic” is a form of government in which the people hold power, but elect representatives to exercise that power."

[@AUTOPSY666]

The United States is a representative democracy. This means that our government is elected by citizens. Here, citizens vote for their government officials. These officials represent the citizens' ideas and concerns in government. Voting is one way to participate in our democracy.

[@ScratchingTheSurface]

ITS A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC

[@JAYTEEUSA]

It's a constitutional republican and a representative democracy. If it wasn't both America would be far more authoritarian and in a worse position than it is in today.

[@deadchannel2811]

Jay T it's a REPBUBLIC

[@Thor.Jorgensen]

A republic without democracy is known as a dictatorship or a Junta. See the Roman Republic, lead by appointed (not elected) dictator Julius Caesar. Or for that matter, Nazi Germany.

[@MA-vd3ln]

@@JAYTEEUSA We are a republic formed by government. We have democracy so we the people have legal freedom to vote. Democracy is an ideology republic allows the government system to have democracy we’re controlled and under a republic..

[@MA-vd3ln]

@@JAYTEEUSA In other words, if we the people allow the republic that Trump has fought for the past four years to protect, be destroyed, we lose our republic and democracy and will no longer have any freedom what so ever and succumb to communism.

[@mossmoonslambeau9332]

This thread shows what has happened since social media started. Arguing over the dumbest things just to be right. And for what? Who cares what you call it? We have all become incredibly picayunish.

[@trentvo2736]

It's a constitutional republic get it right why cannot anybody get this right it's so plain and simple Ben Franklin answered the lady plainly I gave you a republic if you can keep it this is the type of government that our Founders wanted because they knew of the dangers of the democracy, nowhere in the Constitution are the Declaration of Independence does it say the word democracy so do your homework pal and get it right constitutional republic...

[@somacoma2219]

it is as simple as The People's Front of Judia vs The Judian People's Front!

[@dariusblack2997]

I just love when people confuse Representative democracy with Direct Democracy. And they always go with the worst case scenarios to justify their dishonest points. Just read the comments below.

[@AUTOPSY666]

Idiocracy

[@realamerican6101]

Author, Dick Howard

[@emjay2045]

A lot of “words.” NO SPEAK !

[@krasht1]

Everyone is an "Expert" !

[@itsgurrnade-7894]

We’re a constitutional republic… sadly we’re a democracy and why I said that? Democracies turn into dictatorships when one party controls all branches

[@BenjaminRaymundo18]

Yes, but the people always elect those people. We in majority have power compared to complete dictatorship and monarchies. But now, people are set on destroying any ideas that they don’t like and just want their ideas. No one tries to compromise or mind a middle ground.

[@radar0412]

Psst..there are two Parties in Washington. Read a book

[@GrandmasMallCrawler]

​@radar0412 on paper, but functionally, two sides of the same coin. it's political theater

[@radar0412]

@@GrandmasMallCrawler Libertarian Party does not just exist on paper. They have a membership of 700,544. Your comment is deemed to be Dishonest and therefore invalid.

[@GrandmasMallCrawler]

@radar0412 sure, but functionally they do not exist.

[@teddykiefer6432]

Does France have a country? I can’t find the Capitol, Brussels, anywhere on the map🤔

[@teddykiefer6432]

Sounds like they need some more stuff from America and think not getting as much as before means America’s democracy is threatened and under attack and only Progressive Democrats and higher taxes just on Americans will secure it for another 5-10 years...🤔

[@tomfoolery5680]

@@teddykiefer6432 dude. That is one of the most incoherent run-on sentences I've seen in a while, and I teach 3rd graders.

[@mossmoonslambeau9332]

​@@tomfoolery5680 The seven basic sentence patterns may be helpful for person.

[@shadowoof6473]

Not it's not, it's a constitutional republic

[@thisisntme]

With a Representative Democracy.

[@anonymityaddictsanonymous5978]

In France?

[@Peccos]

What

[@floridawix]

Constitutional Republic buddy!!

[@zozzy4630]

dot dot dot question mark

[@1LSWilliam]

All the difference in the world!

[@BrendaColvin]

Preach!

[@andrew2037]

What an ignorant propaganda! Democracy is a form of government by power SOURCE. Republic is a form of government by power IDEOLOGY. Democracy vs Dictatorship, Republic vs Monarchy. This is like color and shape. Or like a "sport car" and "Mercedes"

[@lysergidedaydream5970]

Where is this substantiated? Historically, definitionally, et cetera. And you would consider monarchy an example of power ideology over power source? Why? Sweden is a social democracy politically, but a constitutional monarchy governmentally.

[@andrew2037]

@@lysergidedaydream5970 just check Wikipedia to get more info. List of forms of government.

[@lysergidedaydream5970]

@@andrew2037 Ahh. The issue with this is that, though wikipedia supports their definitions with specific and particular citations(montesquie, brittanica), the system of categorization they use seems to be an invention of their own, or at the very least only one of many forms of taxonomy making use of the same words but radically different ways of organizing them. Basically, there is no reason I should hold wikipedia's self-admittedly method of categorization in any special regard.

[@andrew2037]

@@lysergidedaydream5970 The reason why we should hold Wikipedia's method of categorization is that it's the most popular encyclopedia in the world and most people in the world share that definitions and methods of categorization. And articles are created by people despite of race or political views . And if we want to have a dialog, we must use common language. The same thing is with words "woman" and "racism". Woman is an adult female, not a "one of 35 genders". And DiAngelo can not invent a new definition of racism. Of course, each political group is free to use there own definition. But it would be just a propaganda nothing more. I see this all the time. Some political party do not like most popular definition and choose another one. Communists, conservatives, liberals. I saw this in Soviet union, Belarus and now I see this in US. Do Americans have the same definition of "communism" as most people on the planet? - No Do Republicans have the same definition of "democracy" as most people on the planet? - No Do Republicans have the same definition of "socialism" as Democrats? - No Do Russians have the same definition of "capitalism" as most people on the planet? - No Do leftists have the same definition of "woman" as most people on the planet? - No Why? - Because of propaganda.

[@lysergidedaydream5970]

@@andrew2037 I literally couldn't give less of a shit about your digression here. I was never talking about definitions; wikipedia seems to accurately reflect the word "republic"'s deonotative and connotative meaning. I only have a problem with adopting their system of categorization as supreme, and appealing to it in order to explain, definatively, the difference between republics and democracies. I do just want to throw it out there that philisophical exploration often involves using words in unorthodox ways in order to further explore a preiously shied away-from concept. I don't care to defend DiAngleo, though; I know nothing about her. And no, that is not an invitation for you to tell me what you think of her. Also also, I'm not super attached to linguistic prescriptivism, and you shouldn't be either. I want us to be able to describe the most things possible, because I generally believe that will better enable human flourishing. If that means makig new words, or even using words that have lost much of their relevancy in new way, so be it. It can be a wonderful thing. I do think its bad to scintilate between two different definitions of a word, though. Like, if somebody says "this method of jury selection is systemically racist, because it selects for all white juries a hugely disproportionate ammount of the time" and then says, "therefore, the juge presiding over a case is a racist (as in synonoumous with racial supremacist)". I would have a problem with that. But, if they lay this out to someone (and it is true), I don't necessarily think they would be wrong in calling a defender of that system racist under the first/original/more widely used definition, if that person fully aknowleged the disparity and said "so what?". Personally, though, while I'm not fundementally against the idea of new definitions for words, I don't think its good to do with a word as charged as racist, because it makes it all the easier for someone (listener or speaker) to scintilate between definitions as described above. I think calling something like jury selection "a racially biased system that disproportionately excludes POC from a fundamental american duty" is just fine, and I personally wish DiAngelo had done so. Not because there is a particular problem with what she chose to do, but because she should have anticipated people like you.

[@rodanderson6898]

🤣🤣

[@danielburbano556]

If you allow votes to decide who is the President then Rs in Dem States and Ds in Repub States will actually have their voices heard. Every city, town, and individual matters! R ads in NYC. Dem ads in rural Texas. Candidates going to deep red/blue areas. Because every vote counts! It's the better logic than having 5M less votes yet you still win. You wonder why the majority of the country dislikes Trump? The majority of the country never wanted him to begin with!

[@RobotronSage]

That makes not a lot of sense

[@tomfoolery5680]

@@RobotronSage doesn't make sense? Should someone dumb it down for you? The majority of the country votes for candidate A, but somehow candidate B wins. That's happened 5 times in the US. In favor of Republicans every time. If it were the other way around morons on the right would be spraying tears all over their pickup trucks and gun collection.

[@mike-mz6yz]

Your argument is really Democracy>Republic (not in a democrat, republican sense but in a system of government sense) Democracy being pure majority rule, where republics are majority rule with balances in place to protect minority opinions. For example if you were alive right after 9/11 you will remember that many hatred people had for muslims. Same in WW1 for German-Americans (Who were so attacked within 4 years German immigrants fully intergraded and abandoned their heritage) A democracy could easily and quickly vote to kick them all out or to make them legally second class citizens. In a republic this would take a vast majority and much longer to accomplish. Also considering only around 60% of eligible voters actually vote im not sure you can say the majority is represented by the voting percentages. We have no way of knowing how that other 40% feel. Even though they dont make the effort of voting they still have an opinion to some degree.

[@Ho-opono]

​@@RobotronSage😂🤡

[@BatMan-cq8gq]

What was that incoherent babble?

[@Be_Kind7683]

😢😢😢😢See the people are confused ..... He makes total sense

[@rjung_ch]

This is such BS and yet this is also called free speech. Then the quick stab at socialism, just because he wants to. No context, just BS.

[@kealani6535]

...AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS..." -- from the Pledge of Allegiance. Read the US Constitution and get your facts straight.

[@loribasinger6788]

In that case I'm Cleopatra. It's 100% fact because I have it documented in writing which makes it a fact. Always believe everything you read and hear, especially when it's from your government. 😄. What ever happened to critical thought?

[@user-bw9wk8cc6v]

@Terry Connor prove what you're claiming.

[@BatMan-cq8gq]

@Terry Connor wait till these people find out republic and democracy are essentially the same thing.

[@jakebradford4272]

@@BatMan-cq8gq Republic:- Rule of law and Democracy:- Rule of people so no they are not the same 😂

[@emmittmatthews8636]

@@loribasinger6788 I don't know Lori, but democrats rarely have it.

[@matthewcondie4052]

Democracy for an insignificant minority, democracy for the rich -- that is the democracy of capitalist society.

[@galinageorgieva8554]

true democracy would bring chaos and then oligarchy

[@matthewcondie4052]

@@galinageorgieva8554 true democracy would bring love an laughter.

[@suisiwara2036]

@@matthewcondie4052 no it wont

[@matthewcondie4052]

@@suisiwara2036 A better world is possible.

[@matrixlone]

@@matthewcondie4052 democracy is dead

[@antonioribeiro2818]

= plutocracy

[@chrismcdaniel3666]

The Constitution establishes a federal democratic republic form of government. That is, we have an indivisible union of 50 sovereign States. It is a democracy because people govern themselves. It is representative because people choose elected officials by free and secret ballot.

[@radar0412]

Technically it's a Republic

[@feudinggreeks3316]

No, it isn't a Democracy. In an electoral sense, we are not a Democracy because Hillary Clinton won the majority and still lost. Judicially, we are not a Democracy because the due process of law and a unanimous jury decides the fate of the man, not the majority whims of the posse with execution at the gallows. The difference is a Democracy entails Majority Rule. A Republic entails the Rule of Law. These English definitions are derived from their Latin forebears - Demos Kratia, Res Publica

[@dariusblack2997]

​@@radar0412With a Representative Democracy.

[@radar0412]

@@dariusblack2997 Psst..they're both the same. 😅

[@MadSociety-uy6zg]

Quit lying we are a constitutional Republic not a democracy learn the difference even google says that's what the USA hell our founding fathers have stated this country is a Republic.

[@achair7265]

We are not a democracy let alone representative democracy. We are constitutional representative federal republic. Constitutional because constitution. Federal because of union. Most importantly representative in the way of Congress, the house of representatives. Not the senate nor the presidency. Our representatives obviously take our place when it comes to what should be our original main role in a republic. What role? Not creating laws nor enforcing them, simply proposing them. The messed up part about this democratic lie of sort is the fact that Congress used to elect the senators and had the purse. Actual representatives doing all but electing the president.

[@mr313man]

great saying mr chair

[@achair7265]

@@mr313man Thank you.

[@thisisntme]

Who chooses the Representatives? The majority in the district, right? Also, remember all of those times we have laws on the ballots? It is true that we are a Republic, but to say that we don't have a Representative Democracy would be a lie.

[@achair7265]

@@thisisntme It isn't. Voting is not exclusive to democracy. A democracy and a republic cannot be the same. Democratic republics wouldn't be a thing if they were the same. We are representative republic because of representatives yes, representatives though who are restricted to the legislature only. One of three branches hence republic. Remove them and you will still have a republic. The people will still be restricted. We are not a democracy. I have gone through this argument too many times.

[@achair7265]

@@thisisntme Messed up part is of this conflation of democracy and a republic is our republic being systematically damaged by it. Decreased representation. Senators no longer being voting by the legislative branch. People trying to destroy the electoral college.

[@RoseSiames]

America is a Federal Democratic Republic, a Federal Non-Democratic Republic would be for example The USSR

[@DIANNANTEXAS]

Liar

[@USA50_]

I voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, Former President Trump in his 2nd run and disagree with the point this guest is making. This year I voted Green Party for US Senate, Democratic & Republican for state/county seats.🇺🇲 America is a balance between Democracy & Republicanism. If we try to separate the two it won't work. 🇺🇲 The January 6th Insurrection is unexcusable and we should prosecute anyone who stormed the United States Capital to the fullest extent of the law. 🇺🇲 America must preserve it's sovereignty and integrity for the next generation. America is a Westernized multi-ethnic country with a Westernized multi-ethnic culture always has been always will be. ☺️👍🇺🇲🕉️✝️✡️