Posted by
Jack Fisher on Friday, April 24, 2009 2:33:08 PM
On February 9th 2009 at a press conference, Barack Obama was quoted as saying "The strongest democracies flourish from frequent and lively debate, but they endure when people of every background and belief find a way to set aside smaller differences in service of a greater purpose." This is all well and good, but Obama made one critical mistake in his choice of words.
That lively debate and freedom of expression is not a definitive product of a democracy. It is a product of a republic. It says something about a country when it's elected leader is touting his country as a democracy when it was actually founded as a constitutional republic. Most people don't know the difference, but it is an important issue to consider.
First off, the word "democracy" has it's origins in Ancient Greece. It roughly translates into "people rule." That is to say it is rule by the people. Ancient Athens is the best example of this. Citizens routinely voted on matters of the day, ensuring that no one person had too much power. This all sounds well and good and some of these principles were mentioned by the founding fathers. But the reality is, democracy has one major pitfall. It is subject to majority rule. So if a majority of people want to take away one person or a group of peoples' property, family, or money they can do so. And if enough people are convinced to hand over their voting power to a dictator, then nothing is stopping them. That is why many of the founding fathers looked at democracy with such contempt. Benjamin Franklin is quoted as saying "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch." He and the other founders understood that if they allowed democracy in America, the end result would be tyranny.
As for the word "republic," it also has origins in Ancient Greece. It rougly translates into "public thing." That is to say it is rule by a set body of laws not subject to majority opinion. It was first recommended by the Greek philosopher Solon, but it wasn't implemented until the time of the Ancient Romans. As a republic, Rome became wealthy and prosperous. Much of the opulance that it would later be known for during it's imperial reign (which was not a republic) was made possible by having a government that limited power to it's proper role and left the people alone to live and prosper. This is what the founding fathers went with. They understood if they were to have a government that would grant the people the most freedom and liberty, a republic was the way to go. Democratic principles went only into electing represenatives to uphold the constitution, not to rule as rulers. But that notion has since been forgotten.
Throughout the 20th century, gaining particular momentum in the New Deal, government has been expanded beyond it's limited role largely as a result of the people demanding more. America has since taken on more features of a democracy where people want to be able to exert power to serve their own agenda. People representing the poor lobby for the government to help the poor. People representing oil companies lobby for the government to help oil companies. And people representing dogmatic religious agendas like the Religious Right lobby for the government to help impose their standards on the populous. All of this flies in the face of the constitutional republic that the founders established. Nowhere in the constitution does it specify that the government was to support groups of people over individuals. The focus was and always has been on protecting each individual citizen, granting them under the law the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and property. Government's role is to protect life, ensure individual liberty, and protect one's property. No one individual is to be favored or given special privlidges over any other regardless of their race, gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. It's only when democracy is allowed to grant special privlidges to certain groups that these rights are lost under the guise of 'serving the people.'
The founding fathers understood that whenever democracy reigns, tyranny will eventually follow as the majority imposes their will on the minority. Yet nobody today debates the laurels of whether or not the merits of democracy are contending with the true intent of our government. There are already examples of tyranny creeping in. The passage of proposition 8 in California which banned gay marriage was a perfect example of a majority imposing their will to strip an equal right from a minority. And if more ballot issues emerge, more tyranny can be expected.
The fact remains. America is losing it's way. It's heading down the same path Ancient Rome went down when the people allowed the republic to degrade and ended up an oligarchy ruled by greedy and decadent emporers. Democracy is a fine idea on paper and so is socialism. But in practice it leads only to tyranny. It is only through upholding the republic on which America was founded on that true liberty and prosperity can be enjoyed by all.