posted on Jun, 10 2013 @ 11:25 PM
Originally posted by LifeIsPeculiar
Looks fairly anti-democratic to me - not willing to live with the consequences of not being able to control the Govt. when they are not the majority?
The democratic system is supposed to invoke compromise, that is, the "winners" are supposed to respect and work around the views and perceived needs
of the "losers". That form of statesmanship has been all but lost along the way. It is the right of the governed to reject a governance that does not
The Republican (not the party, the system) way was this; not the democratic way. Democracy was disseminated and dispursed as widely as possible for a
reason in the newly formed United States of America.
Federalist Paper #14 (on the explanation of a democracy and a republic):
It is, that in a democracy, the people meet and exercise the government in person; in a republic, they assemble and administer it by their
representatives and agents. A democracy, consequently, will be confined to a small spot. A republic may be extended over a large region."
Consider further, in Federalist #10:
From this view of the subject...a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer
the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a
majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to
sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have
ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been
violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to
a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their
opinions, and their passions.
To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
--Thomas Jefferson --
Jefferson was a hack. Smart, but a hack,
edit on 10-6-2013 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)