Islamic State

[Rum]

Troll or nut job?

[Seth]

Tyrannical

That is a fallacy that Seth adheres to also.

A republic is a democracy, by definition. A democracy is a system of government in which the leaders are elected by the people. The only difference with a republic is that in a republic, absolutely every one of those leaders has to be elected by the people.

No, that's how socialists would like "republic" to be defined as it relates to the United States because it makes it easier to try to justify the tyranny of the majority. Our nation is a Republic that utilizes certain limited democratic processes in it's political decision making. Our Republic is not a democracy because there are certain things that cannot be done or undone even if 99.999999 percent of the electorate votes to do so.

A "democracy" is a political system where all decisions are made by the people and the majority rules, whether it be through representation or direct plebiscite people, and in which there is no protection whatsoever against the will of the majority for the individual.

A polity governed by elected officials. In a republic, the citizens elect representatives who vote on issues of governance. Often, republics are called democracies, in which citizens themselves vote on issues of governance, but the two terms are not identical.
Reference: financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/...ence

The United States are a distinct form of republic different from many others precisely because the construction of the authority to govern is a charter of negative liberties, meaning our Constitution does not grant unlimited power to Congress, it places constraints upon what Congress (and the states) are permitted by the people to do. Anything not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution as a power to be exercised by Congress is forbidden to Congress and resides either in the state governments, or in the people themselves, who may likewise limit the powers of state governments in the same fashion as Congress is limited.

The fundamental presumption of the Republic of the United States is that ALL political and legal power and authority reside in and flow from the people themselves and their consent to be governed. Every one of these powers and authorities that are granted to government may be revoked at the will of the people. What cannot be revoked by the people are the fundamental, natural and unalienable individual rights enjoyed by every person because those rights exist independent of, prior to, and superior to any and all authority of the government.

Most people would see the difference between republic and British style democracy as simply the fact that the republic has a president instead of a prime minister plus titular monarch. But that is a difference that means little, since the prime minister, in most respects, is a watered down equivalent of president, and the titular monarch has no real power. You could reasonably argue that Britain is also a republic. And republics are simply one form of democracy.

The problem with your analysis is that the "titular monarch" is still the monarch, and all it takes for that person to become the supreme and absolute ruler of the country in fact is a) a vote of Parliament to make it so; or b) a rebellion by the people dissolving Parliament and acknowledging the monarch as absolute ruler; or c) sufficient personal military force to disband Parliament and suppress rebellion by the people.

[Seth]

King George III, the greatest tyrant of the 19th century

Someone really doesn't know what a tyrant is, by the 19th century there were no tyrant kings hadn't been for centuries. They definitely had too much power but it had been on the wane for 700 years.

Mass ownership of slaves that was really tyranny

You don't have to be a king to be a tyrant. Hitler was a tyrant, as was Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez and a host of other individuals who were indeed tyrants.

[JimC]

Galaxian.

Congratulations. I did not think anyone could be more idiotic than Seth, but you have proved me wrong.

There ought to be a shiny medal!

[JimC]

King George III, the greatest tyrant of the 19th century

Someone really doesn't know what a tyrant is, by the 19th century there were no tyrant kings hadn't been for centuries. They definitely had too much power but it had been on the wane for 700 years.

Mass ownership of slaves that was really tyranny

You don't have to be a king to be a tyrant. Hitler was a tyrant, as was Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez and a host of other individuals who were indeed tyrants.

You don't need to make an absurd claim about a king who was mostly a creature of the political forces of the day in England to justify a rebellion against a distant colonial power...

[Blind groper]

Seth

Certainly the USA republic is different to all other democracies. NZ democracy is different to all other democracies. Zimbabwean 'democracy' is different to all other democracies. Australian democracy is different to all other democracies.

No government has unlimited powers, except for tyrannies. The NZ government has constitutional limits on government power. So does all other genuine democracies.

Argue all you will, republics are simply a kind of democracy, and so is the USA variety.

I suspect you simply want to believe that the USA is special, with unique freedoms. Apart from the idiotic lack of gun control, that is simply not true.

[Seth]

Seth

Certainly the USA republic is different to all other democracies. NZ democracy is different to all other democracies. Zimbabwean 'democracy' is different to all other democracies. Australian democracy is different to all other democracies.

No government has unlimited powers, except for tyrannies. The NZ government has constitutional limits on government power. So does all other genuine democracies.

Argue all you will, republics are simply a kind of democracy, and so is the USA variety.

I suspect you simply want to believe that the USA is special, with unique freedoms. Apart from the idiotic lack of gun control, that is simply not true.

Ah, but it is true, you see. We actually are an exceptional country filled with exceptional people who are better, smarter, faster, stronger and better looking than you are.

[JimC]

Although, quite tragically, you don't play cricket...

[Blind groper]

Seth, there are lots of people better, faster and better looking than me. Just not more modest!

[MrJonno]

You don't have to be a king to be a tyrant. Hitler was a tyrant, as was Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez and a host of other individuals who were indeed tyrants

Someone doesn't know their history very well if they think any European king had anywhere near the power of a dictator for what 500 years +. Generally it was the top 5-10% who ran the country and from around the 12th century onwards that began slowly to approach 100% where of course in the US its now back to far smaller numbers running things and heading in a generally backwards direction.

[mistermack]

It's funny how Seth's ideal, of the early US, was founded by the complete disregard for the right to life and property of the indigenous people of North America.

It seems that real libertarianism involves identifying people who are weak and less organised than you, and stealing everything they've got, and killing them.

Yep, that works all right.

And still is working, in Palestine.

[Seth]

It's funny how Seth's ideal, of the early US, was founded by the complete disregard for the right to life and property of the indigenous people of North America.

That's simply not true.

[MrJonno]

To be fair everyone was a bunch of savages in those days, its just only Seth chooses to worship them

[piscator]

It's funny how My ideal, of the early modern Brits, was founded by the complete disregard for the right to life and property of the indigenous people of Asia.

It seems that real Britainism involves identifying people who are weak and less organised than you, and stealing everything they've got, and killing them killing some while putting the rest to work.

Yep, that works all right.

And still is working, in Ireland and Fiji.

[mistermack]

I don't talk up the British Empire.

My parents were both Irish, and my ancestors were mercilessly oppressed by the british aristocracy.
I have no particular pride in being British at all. It's like being proud of having brown hair.