499
Comments (20)
sorted by:
8
deleted 8 points ago +9 / -1
6
boogalations1776 6 points ago +8 / -2

correct. We live in an authoritarian oligarchy now controlled by two parties made up of left wing elites.

3
OakiaPyre [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is why I have no qualms of Trump Seizing everything with military force.

2
boogalations1776 2 points ago +3 / -1

Anybody hoping for some sort of last minute 4d chess move is deluding themselves. We tried the soap box, the ballot box and the jury box. Last step is the cartridge box. It's either that or the gulag.

2
Independenceforever 2 points ago +3 / -1

Wrong.

I am awake now.

My world.

My terms. My conditions.

My republic. And I am fighting a war for it.

According to your FAITH be it unto YOU.

Stop being pundits and spectators. Get in the arena.

3
poconopede 3 points ago +3 / -0

and how "sacred" it is lol

2
maga_sword 2 points ago +2 / -0

yOu’Re A tHrEaT tO oUr DeMoCrAcY!!!!!!

2
rochrealtor 2 points ago +2 / -0

Or referring to democrats as democratic party!!!!!!

1
jimboscott 1 point ago +3 / -2

No shit.

EVERY conservative needs to STRIKE THAT WORD from the vocabulary.

I bet 90% of people on the street also have no idea what the 17th Amendment did...

1
Ichabod 1 point ago +1 / -0

Democratic republic.

1
Usernameunavailable 1 point ago +2 / -1

I also have this problem.

1
farquhar 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hell yes! I swear that is why some of the stupid left vote Democrat. They think it is in line/keeping with the basis for the country.

-5
thecave888 -5 points ago +2 / -7

Meanwhile the Chicoms don't care what we call it so long as they keep controlling it.

But by all means keep those silly Alex Jones pics coming. I'm sure that'll put the Chicoms in their place.

-5
AmericanMonarchist -5 points ago +1 / -6

Its the same thing friend. There is a big umbrella of democratic systems that range from direct democracy to republican democracy. Anytime you have the power vested in the people, you have a democracy. Demo(people)cracy(Rule of).

6
poconopede 6 points ago +6 / -0

pure power to the people is anarchism and when they say they want to empower ppl while simultaneously silencing their grievances its not even a republic

1
AmericanMonarchist 1 point ago +2 / -1

when they say they want to empower ppl while simultaneously silencing their grievances its not even a republic

Every democracy in the world is like this. From Washington to London To Berlin to Rome and even now to Tokyo. At a certain point it becomes clear we are acting like the communists who keep saying real communism doesn't have breadlines. If every time in history you implement this form of government and it turns out the same exact way; its an inherent part of that government.

4
poconopede 4 points ago +4 / -0

Those who need leaders are not qualified to choose them - Michael Malice

3
AmericanMonarchist 3 points ago +3 / -0

I agree. Plato said (to paraphrase) that Wisdom knows those below him, but the foolish do not know those above him. To a fool, the foolish sound wise and the wise sounds foolish. Since the fools are in greater number and hate the wise for trying to build civilization better (which requires demanding fools do not do foolish things), they will seek to dominate them. In a society you either have your worst oppress your best, or your best hold back the worst. The former is democracy, the latter is aristocracy.

2
Isolated_Patriot 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's like saying a Dictatorship and a Monarchy are the same thing. Or that Communism and Fascism are the same thing. A republic has representatives who are responsible to the people, a democracy has elected officials who have absolute power until their next election. There is no comparison apart from neither of them being a dictatorship or a monarchy.

We get the words from Rome, which was at different points in it's history a Republic and a Democracy. Democracy tended toward decadence and hedonisms and unending corruption, while the Republic tended towards mob rule and literal brawls in the street over policy.

Our Constitutional Republic actually sought to bridge the best parts of both a Republic and a Democracy (hence both a Republic house of representatives, and a Democratic Senate) AND a crown in the form of the office of Presidency. All of this was to be united under a common Law which would rule over them all and grant rights to the citizens that could not be touched by the government.

Rome's Democracy allowed a dual justice system, and Rome's Republic saw representatives and citizens killed in riots in the streets. Monarchic rule inevitably becomes tyrannical without an equal power to keep it in check. Our system was designed to allow for the strengths of all the known systems, and to keep their weaknesses in check through coequal governance.

And our founding fathers called this a Constitutional Republic. It is not even remotely the same system as those that arose in Europe to mimic it. We have, however, become a democracy. Elected officials with absolute power until their next election, total corruption and hedonism. The the rule of law and coequal governance are also in critical condition facing down death in a matter of weeks.

2
AmericanMonarchist 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's like saying a Dictatorship and a Monarchy are the same thing. Or that Communism and Fascism are the same thing.

Aristotle would agree. He believed every system of government had a pure form and a corrupted form. So Monarchy had a pure form of Aristocracy and a corrupted form of Despotism.

A republic has representatives who are responsible to the people, a democracy has elected officials who have absolute power until their next election. There is no comparison

In both scenarios, the legitimacy is that the government is for the people. Its like comparing Feudal Monarchies to Absolute Monarchies. Absolute monarchies are more centralized, but they are as much a monarchy as Feudalism.

Our Constitutional Republic actually sought to bridge the best parts of both a Republic and a Democracy. . . Rome's Democracy allowed a dual justice system, and Rome's Republic saw representatives and citizens killed in riots in the streets. Our system was designed to allow for the strengths of all the known systems, and to keep their weaknesses in check through coequal governance.

This is exactly my point. No matter the time period, no matter the location, we never have the idealized form of Democracy. It always turns into what we have now, and it turns into it rather quickly. You had veterans of the War of Independence still kicking when Tammany Hall started going into full swing. The son of a Founding Father rigged an election against a populist. The United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan, Venezuela, Argentina... a bunch of democratic systems started at different times by different people. All collapse in more or less the same way as ours. Every time we defend investing power into the populace rather than our best, we are acting like the communists who keep saying "That wasn't real communism. This time it will be different!" The Founding Father's gave it the best possible chance and it still failed as badly as the one created by a French peasant revolt.

The problems we are facing are inherent to democracy. What we call clown world is just late stage democracy. There is no saving our civilization while saving our republic. One must be sacrificed.