re: A constitutional republic, not a democracy

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.