There’s been a lot of talk about “democracy” lately, and all of it is coming from the Dems, who appear to have found a new word that they love, and can’t stop using it. But do they actually know what it means, and how it pertains to the United States system of government? No, of course not. The left is so clueless, that they actually think you’re a “fascist” if you tell them that the US is not a “democracy,” but a “Constitutional Republic.”
Talking to liberals about government is like talking to them about guns. They have no bloody clue what they’re even saying… These are the people who get their political talking points from those screeching hens on The View.
So, the very popular political duo known as the “Hodgetwins,” decided to call out these mouth-foaming/angry liberals who are going nuts over “democracy,” and ask them a very intriguing question about the US Constitution… the tweet went viral, and of course, the left had nothing to say, because as always, when they’re proven wrong, they just scamper off and start a new fire somewhere else.
Here’s what the Hodge Twins asked: “To the angry leftists calling us fascists for saying the USA is a Constitutional Republic, can you read through the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and show us where the word “Democracy” is?”
To the angry leftists calling us fascists for saying the USA is a Constitutional Republic, can you read through the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and show us where the word “Democracy” is?
— Hodgetwins (@hodgetwins) November 4, 2022
I honestly think Mike Lee put it best when he said this about “democracy.”
“…the United States is not a democracy, but a republic. The confused and vehement media criticism that ensued persuaded me that this point might be better served in an essay rather than a 140-character Tweet.
Insofar as “democracy” means “a political system in which government derives its powers from the consent of the governed,” then of course that accurately describes our system. But the word conjures far more than that. It is often used to describe rule by majority, the view that it is the prerogative of government to reflexively carry out the will of the majority of its citizens.
Our system of government is best described as a constitutional republic. Power is not found in mere majorities, but in carefully balanced power. Under our Constitution, passing a bill in the House of Representatives—the body most reflective of current majority views—isn’t enough for it to become law. Legislation must also be passed by the Senate—where each state is represented equally (regardless of population), where members have longer terms, and where (under current rules) a super-majority vote is typically required to bring debate to a close. Thomas Jefferson described the Senate as the “saucer” that cools hot passions more prevalent in the House. It’s where consensus is forged, as senators reach compromise across regional, cultural, and partisan lines.
Once passed by both houses of Congress, a bill still doesn’t become a law until it’s signed (or acquiesced to) by the president—who of course is elected not by popular national vote, but by the electoral college of the states.
And then, at last, the Supreme Court—a body consisting not of elected officials, but rather individuals appointed to lifetime terms—has the power to strike down laws that violate the Constitution. What could be more undemocratic?
As I said in a follow-up Tweet, democracy itself is not the goal. The goal is freedom, prosperity, and human flourishing. Democratic principles have proven essential to those goals, but only as part of a system of checks and balances among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the federal government, as well as between the federal government and the states.
Rest assured, every single critic who attacked me for correctly crediting America’s political success as a republic, not a democracy, supports counter-democratic checks and balances on majorities he disagrees with. My critics support Supreme Court decisions that overturned democratically enacted laws. They support Democratic filibusters of conservative legislation to, for instance, repeal Obamacare or allow for school choice or build a border wall to stop illegal immigration.
Advocates of “democracy” have convinced themselves the obstacle to progress in Washington is all these counter-democratic parts of our system. In truth, Congress’s failure to pass sweeping progressive—or conservative—legislation in recent decades is a signal that neither party has won the necessary support from the American people to pass it. That does not indicate a flaw in the system, but flaws in the two parties’ agendas. This is a feature, not a bug.
In the absence of national consensus, there isn’t supposed to be federal law. That’s what the states are for—to provide smaller, more homogeneous polities to reflect our broad national diversity. There is no reason New Yorkers and South Carolinians and Hawaiians have to have the exact same health care or education or welfare or tax policies. If diversity is a strength—and nearly all Americans agree that it is—our diversity has to be allowed to flex its muscles.”
I also think our 4th President, Mr. James Madison had a very good take on the potentially dangerous side of “democracy.”
It is of great importance in a republic, not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers; but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure.
He also pointed out that in order to have a successful “democracy” the people must be highly informed and very involved… which are the farthest things we have going for us today.
A people who mean to be their own governors, must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives. A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy or perhaps both.
By Madison’s words and the example given, I think you can clearly see where we’re going very wrong… Needless to say, this failed Biden admin, and its so-called “love of democracy,” is both a farce and a tragedy.
This post originally appeared on WayneDupree.com.