re: A constitutional republic, not a democracy

I think the 'Jump the Shark' moment was the moment it became vogue to refer to anyone who doesn't politically align with you in any way or for any reason as a "threat to democracy."

At least that's pretty much when I decided that this word is now void of pretty much any functional meaning.

quote:

---

RogerTheShrubber

---

quote:

---

As intended.

Change the language, change the culture.

---

You see, the America and democracy they are talking about. When they say America, they are talking about the UNITED STATES, a corporate entity. Their democracy is that corporations codes, statutes and the privileges they choose to give to It's citizens, persons and residents.

The united states of America have a constitution, un-a-lien-able rights and laws for the men and women. In this union of states, men and women are referred to as We The People.

quote:

---

So is "Democratic People’s Republic"

They'll tell you they have a democracy.

---

Meaningless gibberish. Countries, like China and Iran, manage their authoritarian governments by selecting which candidates the people can vote for.

It's long past the time that we should look into why we hear the term from the Left so much nowadays.

Has there ever been a time when the "term" was used as much or more than one hears it being invoked by the Left presently?

Actually there was: leading up to and after the Bolsheviks' successful bloody Revolution of 1917 - at least according to the writings of the ideology's original Founders.

Probably because they, like the liberals of today, believed they had the numbers with the emerging proletariat that they depended upon so much and had such faith in.

Of course, that blind faith blew up in their faces when the proletariat began to look for other options when they realized that they were expected to offer themselves up as cannon fodder for the Revolution - and then afterwards when their leaders would attempt to spread it to other countries.

Here's how one of the "original leaders" - the most important one - viewed democracy and how he saw it as just a transitional stage necessary for the eventual success of communism:

Democracy is of great importance to the working class in its struggle for emancipation from the capitalists.

But democracy is by no means a boundary that must not be overstepped; it is only one of the stages on the road from feudalism to capitalism and from capitalism to Communism.

Democracy means equality.

The great significance of the proletariat's struggle for equality and the significance of equality as a slogan will be clear if we correctly interpret it as meaning the abolition of classes.

But democracy means only formal equality.

And as soon as equality is obtained for all members of society in relation to the ownership of the means of production, that is, equality of labor and equality of wages, humanity will inevitably be confronted with the question of going beyond formal equality to real equality, i.e., to applying the rule, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

Democracy is a form of state, one of its varieties.

Consequently, it, like every state, on the one hand represents the organized, systematic application of force against persons; but on the other hand it signifies the formal recognition of the equality of all citizens, the equal right of all to determine the structure and administration of the state.

This, in turn, is connected with the fact that, at a certain stage in the development of democracy, it first rallies the proletariat as the revolutionary class against capitalism, and enables it to crush, smash to atoms, wipe off the face of the earth the bourgeois, even the republican bourgeois, state machine, the standing army, the police and bureaucracy, and to substitute for them a more democratic state machine, but a state machine nevertheless, in the shape of the armed masses of workers who are being transformed into a universal people's militia.

Here "quantity is transformed into quality": such a degree of democracy implies overstepping the boundaries of bourgeois society, the beginning of the Socialist reconstruction.

From Lenin's Workers' Control of the State and the Economy

So much of what we see and hear going on today is buried in those few paragraphs.

BTW, who is it we know that it has been brought to our attention regards Lenin as his mentor and role model?

Oh, that's right the one who some believe naively is going to save us all from the wickedness and snares of the globalists.

quote:

---

BTW, who is it we know that it has been brought to our attention regards Lenin as his mentor and role model? Oh, that's right the one who some believe naively is going to save us all from the wickedness and snares of the globalists.

---

Whom is this referencing?

quote:

---

Whom is this referencing.

---

Can play the coy game also.

Actually, you do know.

It's the one whom the European Institute has identified as the world leader who complies with just about every principle of the Bolshevik Code, and is a devotee of Lenin, and who spent many of his waking hours reading his writings, which apparently struck a responsive chord with him.

But who is presented on here as some sort of new version of the great liberator Simon Bolivar.

So how many world leaders do we know that have the bloody Lenin as their mentor and role model.

Really have to mention the little black Russian Bolshevik's name?

quote:

---

manage their authoritarian governments by selecting which candidates the people can vote for.

---

quote:

---

So do we.

---

While you could argue that, like China / North Korea, we too have a single party (uniparty),

like us, this guy isn’t a part of their club (any longer):

quote:

---

So is "Democratic People’s Republic"

They'll tell you they have a democracy.

Meaningless gibberish.

---

Holy frick, Penrod actually got the point of a conversation. I am blown away.

quote:

---

The term republic … is a form of government where law supersedes the whims of the any one group.

---

You are mistaken and thinking of a “constitutional republic,” with emphasis on the boldface.

quote:

---

Webster
a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law

Britannica
form of government in which a state is ruled by representatives of the citizen body.

Dictionary.com
a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.

Collins
A republic is a country where power is held by the people or the representatives that they elect.

---

I could cite 20 more.

quote:

---

You are mistaken and thinking of a “constitutional republic,” with emphasis on the boldface.

---

Nope.

And you can quote all the internet dictionaries you want but they’ll fact of the matter remains that a “republic” as defined by its creators, the Romans, was a system of government where the public owned a common set of regulations and limitations and these laws applied equally to all and could not be rescinded by the majority of citizens or collective of politicians.

The genesis of the term is “res” (thing) “publica” (of the people)