--- On Thu, 9/18/08, James B. Byrne <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> A republic is, quite literally, a public thing (res publica) and the
> term simply means that the form of government is generally accepted and
> participated in by all citizens.  You can have a republican government
> with a hereditary king or queen so long as that person is bound by the 
> same laws as all other people and the system requires active consent of 
> the citizenry for that person to assume the office. 

snip...

I would never want to get into a war of words with someone as prolific as 
James, but.... By definition, a republic is a political unit governed by a charter, while a democracy is a government whose prevailing force is always that of the majority.

Needless to say, some people in the US, think there is NO charter or "contract" with the people.   Some people think our constitution is a "living" document, that defines what the majority (democracy) wants.



> 
> The unfortunate creature that the supposed Tyler envisages
> would indeed be a poor thing, but such is unlikely to ever arise. 

Hmmm, have you been paying attention to the news in the US?  Out Treasury is bankrupt, our Representatives are bought and paid for by the lobbyist's.   The examples are numerous, and on both sides of the isle.  

> It is the nature of societies to restrict access to power.  

No, it is the nature of societies to look for a messiah (and for the scapegoat).  The public wants a silver bullet answer to all their problems.


-Craig

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *