Suppose that you’re walking down the street and you come to an intersection.
There is a man standing there with his dog. You sidle up next to him and say, “Hey, nice dog!” Now suppose that the man looks at you, smirks, and says, “This isn’t a dog. It’s a German Shepherd.” Presumably, you would look at the person quizzically before slowly backing away.
While that analogy is imperfect, its’ basic premise holds vis-à-vis the popular debate regarding the type of government that we have in the U.S. Specifically, there are many people who claim that this nation is “not a democracy;” rather, “it’s a republic.”
The problem with that argument is, well, it’s wrong. For at least two reasons. One is the fact that a republic is a subset of democracy, which renders the argument wrong both factually and logically. Further, most people who make that argument cite (usually unspecified) “Founding Fathers” to make their case.
This is a classic logic fallacy known as “an appeal to authority” (i.e., what people often do when they don’t have an actual argument).
To help clear things up, some definitions are in order. First, what is a republic? James Madison offered a pretty clear definition in Federalist 39:
“…we may define a republic to be, or at least may bestow that name on, a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior.
Every democracy that exists today fits the Madisonian definition of a “republic.” Thus, practically speaking, there is no difference between a republic and a democracy. In short, being a democracy and being a republic is not contradictory; as suggested above, a republic is a subset of the broad category of government known as a “democracy.”
This leads to our other definition. Democracy is a broad term. In its most basic form, it means that nations have “free and fair elections” to choose the people who will lead them. (The English word “democracy” comes from two Greek words that together mean “the people have the power” or “the people rule.”)
Our form of government is often defined as “Western liberal democracy.” Unfortunately, this has become a problematic phrase because millions of people in this country have no idea what the word “liberal” means in that context.
This is in counter-distinction to nations, such as the absurdly named “People’s Republic of China” or “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” (aka North Korea).
China and North Korea are communistic nations. They have elections which are neither free nor fair.
Finally, it can be credibly argued that a republic is any form of government that is not a monarchy or a fascist state.
A single ruler literally owns the government and, by extension, the people. Those people usually have little freedom and even fewer rights. Tragically, in some cases, a majority of a population has actually chosen this form of government.
Sadly, many of these people believe that being a Democrat (i.e., a member of one of two major U.S. political parties) is inherently less legitimate than being Republican (i.e., a member of the other major U.S. political party). But being a Republican or a Democrat has almost nothing to do with the forms of government from which they long ago derived their names.
This nation is at an intersection. Or, better yet, we’re at a crossroads. In the end, it doesn’t really matter whether we are a democracy or a republic if we’re tilting towards authoritarianism.
We must avoid that at all costs.
Larry Smith is a political columnist for the Indianapolis Recorder