- Here is some additional material coming from the US government itself: www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/lesson-plans/Intermediate_RightsandResponsibilities_handouts.pdf & www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/lesson-plans/Government_and_You_handouts.pdf - Encyclopedia Britannica: www.britannica.com/topic/representative-democracy - Link to the American Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor which is responsible for promoting democracy all over the world: www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/under-secretary-for-civilian-security-democracy-and-human-rights/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/ - Wikipedia article about different types of government: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_forms_of_government (This gives a pretty good overview of all the different ways this can be categorized. You'll find the US being mentioned as an example in a lot of the categories, including the democracy categories.)

@GRT1865

19 күн бұрын

I'm sorry you have to deal with this subject. You have probably found out already that it is politically motivated speech from recent time in the USA. It's like arguing if a zebra is black and white or white and black. Hope you and yours are doing well. Stay safe. Take care. Have fun. 😎 Everyone have a wonderful day.

@TheDogGeneral

19 күн бұрын

​​@@GRT1865I wouldn't make apologies on someone else's behest or behalf part of the world virtues that we celebrate is the diversity of thought and interplay both verbal and academics as I've covered it before we live in politically charged times and depending on where you stand in the political Spectrum the word democracy and Republic have stigma attached to them that once upon a time wasn't as potent. But now the stigma is very measurable in the functional aspect of day-to-day life and historically the United States is ruled by law so I would say it's closer to the definition of a republic it does have some strong reservoirs of democratic Traditions from democracy but I would say the United States isn't a holy functional democracy especially when economic contractions cause political instability and with respect to Ms Feli she is not a lifetime citizen of the United States and thus has it from her own perspective she's entitled to her opinions. However she's not an expert on everything with regards to the United States her people her political system and her Traditions these are things that are as if you will a cipher that come with time and observation of a society and such cultural interpretations of governments are not always applicable and can't be understood in one segment or section of a person's life it comes with time 100 years ago the German Nation itself didn't have a lot of experience with representative forms of government and thus that's one of the reasons why it had a turbulent start when the Weimar Republic was established the United States on the other hand had been around since 1776 and was a lot more experienced in the art of representative government but that was in 1924 as opposed to Germany which is just emerged from Imperial rule.

@TimothySielbeck

19 күн бұрын

Because it IS a republic. It used to be taught in schools. 50 years ago I had it in eighth grade. Again in high school. I couldn't tell you what is being taught these days. A republic is a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated chief executive. And we are a nation composed of 50 equal states that all use essentially the same system.

@DannyMcDavid

19 күн бұрын

This is the answer from meta AI you can't say this is the right wing answer.The United States is technically a constitutional federal republic, but it is often referred to as a democracy. Here's the distinction: - _Republic_: A republic is a form of government where power is held by the people or their elected representatives, and the head of state is usually a president or prime minister. In a republic, the rules and laws are outlined in a constitution, and the government is divided into separate branches (executive, legislative, and judicial) to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful. - _Democracy_: A democracy, on the other hand, is a broader term that refers to a system of government where power is held by the people, either directly or through elected representatives. In a democracy, the majority's views and interests are represented, and individual rights and freedoms are protected. The United States is a republic because it has a constitution that outlines the powers and limits of government, and it has a system of representative democracy, where citizens elect representatives to make decisions on their behalf. However, it is often referred to as a democracy because it is a system of government that is intended to serve the will of the people and protect individual rights and freedoms. So, to summarize: the United States is a constitutional federal republic, but it is often referred to as a democracy because it shares many democratic principles and values.

@chessnut4886

19 күн бұрын

@@TheDogGeneral FACTS! The big problem of our time is that people believe they can feel facts and invent them for themselves. What makes a democracy is generally recognized knowledge. There is NO ROOM for “we celebrate (...) the diversity of thought”!

as a brazilian this weird ideia also bothers me so much. and people insist on it. it's basic and it's taught in school. there's monarchy x republic, in parallel there's federations x unitary states, in parallel there's democracy x autocracy, in parallel there's presidencial x parliamentary. brazil is presidential democratic federal republic. germany is a parliamentary democratic federal republic, italy is a parliamentary democratic unitary republic, the netherlands is a parliamentary democratic unitary monarchy. venezuela is a presidential autocratic unitary republic. it's not hard to grasp

@lazyboy300

19 күн бұрын

and no country today exist as a full direct democracy. not even switzerland. every modern democracy is representative to some level. that said, other aspects are as important as voting to determine a democracy: rule of law (equal legal treatment for everybody and due process), civil liberties (freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly), division of government into at least 3 branches (executive, judicial, legislative) with checks and balances between them, limits to the power and length of term of elected officials, respect for human rights, power controlled by civilians and not the military, fair and transparent elections

@GNMi79

18 күн бұрын

@@lazyboy300 Seems like the US is missing several of those today.

@lazyboy300

18 күн бұрын

@@GNMi79 yeah, brazil too, unfortunately. not perfect democracies by any means, there's a lot of room for improvements. but still... to be fair, most dictatorships have some traces of democracy in them. some universities and ngos use a scale of some sort, but i don't know a lot about those

@oneukum

17 күн бұрын

That is a modern thing that arose in the 20th century. It is also entirely possible to have a state in which only a minority votes. The US constitution in the form it was written provided for people to need to meet a qualification like owning land or paying taxes to be allowed to vote. That was not unusual at the time. The US thus had free, but not equal elections.

@thomaskalbfus2005

14 күн бұрын

Germany was a Parliamentary democratic republic before Hitler rose to power, Georgia was a parliamentary democratic republic before they passed this Russia legislation, Russia had a parliament system before Putin and it became a rubber stamp for whatever Putin wants. Those Russian legislators don't seem to care about what the public wants as they vote to restrict rights and draft people in the army sending people to the front and all that. If Putin and Hitler were able to become dictators under a parliamentary system, that seems to indicate a weakness for that form of government.

As a retired high school social studies teacher, I found your presentation very informative and educational. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

@WolfgangManichl

19 күн бұрын

Not knowing whether you were a teacher in the US or in a different country ... but if you had been teacher in the US: can you explain why the US citizens so vigorously insist that they are a republic rather than a democracy? Is it because they want to separate themselves from the system of state in Great Britain?

@davesaunders7080

19 күн бұрын

@@WolfgangManichl Many US citizens want to think they are better than anyone else, tied in with very high emphasis on patriotism.

@rjohne7

19 күн бұрын

@@WolfgangManichl A republic is a form of government in which the people elect, or choose, their leaders. In most countries with a republican government, the people elect the head of the government. Today most countries are true republics, meaning that the people choose their leaders. These republics practice a form of democracy. The United States, Mexico, India, France, Kenya, South Korea, Peru, and Indonesia are only a few of the world’s many true republics. Some countries call themselves republics simply because a monarch is not the leader. However, they are not always democracies. Other countries practice democracy but are not really republics, either. In the United Kingdom the people vote for representatives in Parliament the country’s lawmaking body, but they also have a monarch. Finally, in The United States, the President is directedly elected by the people; not chosen by the majority party in power, like in a parlimentary system. Furthermore, the president is both the head of state and the head of government. So yes, the U.S. is a democracy, but as defined by our Constitution., we are a Republic. Btw, the U.S. Constitution is the Supreme law in America. So that is a big reason for so many people being adamant about calling our country a republic. Many will say it's just a nuance between the two terms.

@ssgtmole8610

18 күн бұрын

@@rjohne7 The american president is elected by the Electoral College. If america had direct election of presidents, Republicans would not have been elected president since the moron 'W''s win in 2004 (after actually losing Florida in 2000). So, no mad cheeto in 2016.

@GNMi79

18 күн бұрын

@@rjohne7 The US president isn't directly elected by the people. State electors elect the president using the electoral college system. The president is not elected by popular vote, as Hillary Clinton found out in 2016.

We are a Consitutional Republic which is a form of Democracy. What is the confusion?

@dickeyseamus

19 күн бұрын

Fascists have been trying to "educate" mainly right-wingers that we are not. It's kind of working, look who people are electing.

@southcoastinventors6583

19 күн бұрын

Unless individuals have the power of the purse, it is a shallow form of democracy at best

@xxpvpmasterskillerproskyen514

19 күн бұрын

A constitutional Republic isn’t automatically a form of democracy. Quite apart from the fact that almost every republic is based on a constitution, democracy and republic have nothing to do with each other. China is also a republic, for lack of a monarch as head of state. And indeed China also has a constitution. Objectively speaking, you probably wouldn’t consider China to be a democracy.

@seeme6285

19 күн бұрын

You have the opportunity to decide the colour of the party in power. That is about it. That is apparently democracy.

@tomcleave2622

19 күн бұрын

America has more than is share of idiots that where trump came from the uneducated can see the problem………..

I think this comes from the etymological links between "democracy" and "Democrats" as well as "republic" and "Republicans", and from the fact that this country is deeply divided and partisans of each party hate everything that reminds them of the other party. If the parties were called "Freedom Party" and "Liberty Party", people would argue that US-Americans enjoy liberty, not freedom - or vice versa, depending on their political affiliation.

@ashleighelizabeth5916

18 күн бұрын

Sadly there is likely some truth in that. After all these are the same fools that try to take credit for being the Party of Lincoln while flying Confederate flags in their front yard that that their ancestors often followed into battles during the Civil War. They are also the kind of people that insist that N@zis were socialist and that therefore fascism is a far left ideology and not a far right ideology. It's like back of the cereal box level of understanding of constitutional law and US and world history.

@filrabat1965

15 күн бұрын

Perfect 10! You Nailed it! This confusion comes from partisan agendas, wanting to bend their government into their own favor. One party more than the other, if you ask me.

@smftrsddvjiou6443

15 күн бұрын

Yes, the names of the two poltical parties in the US is confusing.

@residentzero

14 күн бұрын

It's called "mountain mutants get access to the Internet and believe they're scholars". Perks of democracy, ironically, and the same people, who hate democracy, they vote!! 😱

@user-bi2by7rf8m

13 күн бұрын

good analogy. the same is true with consitutional republic or representitive democracy, and figuring out is any semblance of those things.

As a Brit, I get just as annoyed when people claim the UK isn't a democracy just because it's a monarchy. The UK is a constitutional monarchy which is a form of democratic government. But people from countries under a republican system just can't seem to wrap their head around this for some reason

@Habakuk_

19 күн бұрын

I think this has less to do with the monarchy and more because there are only 2 major parties in the UK. Japan, for example, has also a monarchy and a democracy and is still not viewed that way. ps: With two parties it is also much easier to bribe politicians than if there are several parties.

@oliversherman2414

19 күн бұрын

@@Habakuk_ I gave up on our political parties after Brexit. That whole mess has ruined our country and I knew it would from the beginning 😤

@ClownWorldOrder

19 күн бұрын

@@Habakuk_ A democracy can have any number of parties.

@pleegjepleegje

19 күн бұрын

I think it's understandable. Monarchies are rather archaic, but as long as they are democracies, it's also highly entertaining 😊

@oliversherman2414

19 күн бұрын

@@pleegjepleegje modern day monarchies aren't like the feudal monarchies of the past

The funny thing is that they are kind of the same word. Democracy is Greek; Republic is Latin. Demos + kratia = People + rule. Res publica = A thing of the people. So from a 10,000-foot view, I don't see the point of the debate. Your comment at 3:16 is perfect==the terms are not mutually exclusive. Vielen Dank!

@ashleighelizabeth5916

18 күн бұрын

PRECISELY. By it's very definition going back to Latin a Republic IS a form of democracy.

It’s crazy this has to even be explained.

@TribalGuitars

19 күн бұрын

amen

@TheDogGeneral

19 күн бұрын

And that is a flawed statement it's crazy to explain to educate ? It is cover conversely in schools and courses but it's never explained and functional details at least not adequately in recent years that's where I find the most dysfunction comes from folks don't want to take the time to work something out and we see the results of do as I say not do as I was instructed

@timan2039

19 күн бұрын

As the op said, “It’s crazy this has to even be explained.”

@TheDogGeneral

19 күн бұрын

@@timan2039 and still it's not crazy where the term crazy is applicable is is rudimentary at best without a solid credible explanation it's not crazy when a society or a government has Blended elements of both or more than one

@jamccallister

19 күн бұрын

Maybe a better term would be silly?

Those terms are in different categories. Feli is correct, a country can be a democratic republic (US, Germany, France), non-democratic republic (China, GDR, old Venice), democratic non-republic (UK, Denmark, Belgium) and neither (Saudi Arabia or any other absolute monarchy).

0:25 Those comments are so strange! I have never ever heard anyone proudly declare that their country is not a democracy, and say that's a good thing! That is so odd, especially considering how many countries that aren't democracies love to claim they are. I thought it was a universally recognised good thing to be.

@lorrainehirsch

9 күн бұрын

I have heard this a lot on social media, where some Americans will angrily insist that the US is a republic, *not* a democracy. It sounds to me as though they are trying to install a non-democratic republic.

@eduardtsuranov712

8 күн бұрын

Good thing in words is not always good in reality(To name does not mean to be). George Carlin spoke a lot about the problems of democracy and freedom in the United States. Many Americans do not consider their country democratic and free enough.

@zo1dberg

2 күн бұрын

It's not a universally good thing at all. It's just better than everything else that's been tried. Democracy is fine as long as the government isn't all powerful like most governments are these days. Decentralisation of power is best, centralisation of power is bad, even if it's a democratically elected power.

When they say “democracy,” they mean “direct democracy.” They don’t realize there are other forms of democracy.

@angelkar5132

19 күн бұрын

That's accurate in fact. If you look into the history and etymology of the term 'democracy', there cannot exist 'indirect' democracy as it's a contradiction. The term is misused for so many years to call 'representative democracy' what in fact is an elected oligarchy (the few are elected to rule, which is the literal meaning of 'elected oligarchy').

@blafonovision4342

19 күн бұрын

@@angelkar5132 mmmm…no. An oligarchy is rule by a small number of individuals, who have no mandate from the masses. They are usually there by wealth. An oligarch represents his interests only.

@blafonovision4342

19 күн бұрын

@@angelkar5132 so “representative democracy” is accurate and appropriate.

@angelkar5132

19 күн бұрын

@@blafonovision4342 Olig comes from ολίγος/ολίγοι meaning few and archy from άρχω meaning rule. Demo comes from δήμος (the people more or less, the citizens all together) and 'cracy' from κρατώ another verb meaning having the power or ruling. So, from an etymology point of view Oligarchy means just that a 'special' minority has the power and makes the decisions, while democracy that body of the citizens does it. From historical point of view democracy was born in ancient Athens where the citizens of the city took over the political power from the elites (only men participated in fact though, different times). At some point during the war against Spartans that they eventually lost, things got hard and some managed to convince the Athenians to vote for Oligarchy including an elected body kind of a parliament. Later, after their loss, occupation and liberation from the Spartans they re-established democracy for some time before it fell apart again and kind of disappeared as a form of making political decisions in a state. I don't know what happened after that with these words, but many centuries later, these words started to be used in a way that is different. To some extent this sounds ok, language evolves. But I'm the case of democracy it started meaning even contradictory things to its original concept and etymology. Which in combination to other things, can have practical effect on politics.

@reinhard8053

16 күн бұрын

@@blafonovision4342 Which is something the US is getting nearer and nearer.

Very simple: Republic = not a monarchy Democracy = people vote on laws, either directly or through representatives Therefore the UK is a democracy but not a Republic, North Korea is a Republic but not a democracy, with the US being both

@alyson42

19 күн бұрын

North Korea isn’t really a republic either, though. It’s an autocracy, led by a dictator (dictatorships are not republics and they’re not technically monarchies either - although having a “supreme leader” with succession passed down generations of one family seems pretty close lol). Countries such as North Korea and China, for example, may use the words “democratic” or “republic” in their names, but this does not mean that they are democracies or republics in practice.

@MichaelBurggraf-gm8vl

19 күн бұрын

The word republic is a contraction of the two latin words res publica (public things, public matters). Ancient Rome had several different kinds of governments and also was a monarchy for some time. When influential families became fed up with that monarch/king they decided to create an oligarchic/aristocratic senate system (SPQR: Senatus PopulusQue Romanorum). Only members of a class of well established citizens of Rome whose families had lived in Rome for several generations were allowed to vote and get elected as senators. The senators would then elect a government. Later, under the rule of Ceasar and Augustus, that Rome returned to a more autocratic kind of government in which the name Ceasar became a kind of title of a ruler. The German title Kaiser and the Russian title of Tsar originated from that latin name (king is rex in latin and queen is regina; the English word like the German König/Königin have germanic origin). The term democracy originated from ancient Greece where the first democray was formed in the city republic of Athens. Would some of the people insisting on the USA being a republic prefer the USA to be ruled by a group of priviledged citizens by restricting voting rights for less priviledged people?

@trevorcorkery

19 күн бұрын

Your definition of a republic is wrong. Republic is just a country defined by laws. The Magna Carta made the UK a republic long ago. Has nothing to do with a Monarchy.

@calguy3838

19 күн бұрын

@@trevorcorkery "Your definition of a republic is wrong." @maximilianbeyer5642 is right. The United Kingdom is not and never has been a republic. Republics can take different forms, but countries that have a monarch as head of state, even a toothless monarch as in the UK, are not republics.

@trevorcorkery

19 күн бұрын

@@calguy3838 lol… no

I, as a german, didn't know the exact meaning of republic. That's for explaining it.

@conlon4332

19 күн бұрын

You mean "thanks" not "that's". "That's" is short for "that is" while "thanks" is like "thank you". Like "I give you my thanks" or "I thank you". Just so you know for next time, it's ok to make mistakes.

@NickNobody161

19 күн бұрын

You live in the "Federal Republic of Germany" How did you not know?

@conlon4332

18 күн бұрын

@@NickNobody161 To my understanding, that's just the official name of the country, but it's normally just called Germany or Deutschland. Germans aren't obsessed with their country like Americans are, so it's probably just a fact that everyone knows but most don't think about very much.

@junekazama4578

18 күн бұрын

​​​@@conlon4332Du weißt schon, dass bei einem gewissen Teil der Bevölkerung in Deutschland die Besessenheit einer bestimmten Vorstellung unseres Landes, Deutschland, massiv zugenommen hat. Unter anderem die nervigen "Blauherzen", Reichsbürger und andere die zB gern ein Kalifat ausrufen würden. Oder? Der Sturm des amerikanischen Kapitols, sollte auch hier stattfinden, hat in Anfängen stattgefunden, wurde zum Glück abgewürgt.

@josueveguilla9069

15 күн бұрын

​@@conlon4332Germans should at least care about their country being invaded by illegal aliens from the Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc, though.

I have had this battle with Americans for decades. You even have university professors arguing that the US isn’t a democracy!

@FelifromGermany

19 күн бұрын

So weird! This is simple political science. Of course, you can always argue about how well the democratic elements of the US are working in practice, but the fact that democracy is the underlying idea and form of government isn't really up for debate. The US has also been known for spreading democracy all over the world for deacdes, there's even a dedicaded government bureau for this: www.state.gov/policy-issues/human-rights-and-democracy/

@jdanon203

19 күн бұрын

@@FelifromGermany Even Trump said "America is the greatest democracy in the world" when he was president. You can argue about the superlative of course, but if the president of the USA says it is a democracy, then why is anyone even arguing this? Surely if anyone would know it would be the president right?

@kensmith5694

19 күн бұрын

@@jdanon203 Trump saying it is evidence against the idea. Did Mexico pay for the wall? When was "infrastructure week"?

@SW-gf6zl

18 күн бұрын

​@@jdanon203 Although one can't trust almost anything that Trump says, in this case he obviously made a true point.

@DaGo314

18 күн бұрын

@@FelifromGermany “It has been observed that a pure democracy, if it were practicable, would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this.” -Alexander Hamilton You think it's "Weird" but our founder made sure to write down against purely throwing the word "Democracy" around like a child throwing around his father's gun out in the open. People who leave out the words "Constitutional Republic" do so out of malice to water down the importance of the Constitution.

My 2 cents: Yes, you are correct in that the US is a constitutional republic, which is a democratic-type government (not a pure democracy). The reason I believe people are hyper-sensitive on this topic is there are people who want their views immediately adopted (irrespective of what those views are) and demand we vote on them NOW because we are a democracy. These people miss the point we live in a constitutional republic. If you want to change things, fine - but there are procedures put in place as to how and when changes can be made. Those wanting CHANGE NOW! want to override everyone else's views, so everyone else tends to have a knee-jerk reaction whenever they hear someone claiming we are a democracy. On this point people need to take a few breaths before they explode, and listen to what has actually been said versus what they may have thought was being said. And, maybe some people need to have a civics class or something.

@lddcavalry

13 күн бұрын

Best comment here.

Okay, as a swiss, I have to do the same the americans did in the earlier mentioned videos: Switzerland is NOT a direct democracy 😀 Switzerland is a semi-direct democracy. In theory, it is set up as a representative democracy. Meaning people vote their representatives into their Government. But, it also has this back door that citizen can directly create laws and also make a referendum for laws the government issues. Those two trigger a public vote. And every change to the federal constitution also has to be voted on by the public. It only seems like a direct democracy because of the nature of politics. Political parties never see eye to eye so almost every mayor issue get a referendum (which is very easy to do in Switzerland, all you need is 50'000 signatures from citizen) and they end up with a public vote. Edit: It should be mentioned though in all fairness that even most swiss don't understand that little detail. And if people who understand it try to talk to foreigners, we often get the feeling that foreigners, like germans, americans and brits, usually only hear the part they like. Kinda like a selective hearing. The swiss way of government is very unique and very complicated. On the surface it looks very easy, but if you dive deeper you see how weird and complicated it is. The biggest downside, which, I think, is also its biggest advantage, is that it takes a long time for things to change. But when they do, it is very thought out and has sustenance. And is made in a way it has a huge majority of the population backing the new law

@FelifromGermany

14 күн бұрын

True, it's definitely more complicated than that but Switzerland is typically listed under the category of "Direct Democracy" in most political science sources.

@shanwyn

14 күн бұрын

@@FelifromGermany I get that, Feli. And my comment wasn't meant as a critique, just as a little addition to your video 😉 I think we swiss are a bit paranoid when it comes to politic and power, so we do everything to avoid enabling one person or group to get too much power. Hence the 7 head of states or the avoidance of even having a capitol named LOL

The United States is a federal constitutional republic. One US embassy website states: "While often categorized as a democracy, the United States is more accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic", even Wiki for "Federal government of the United States" states: "The federal government of the United States (U.S. federal government or U.S. government) is the national government of the United States, a federal republic located primarily in North America". A federal republic is :a federation of states with a republican form of government."

@robertjames-life4768

19 күн бұрын

You beat me to it.

@bernardmulligan5504

19 күн бұрын

Still using a democratic system

@thomaskalbfus2005

19 күн бұрын

And why does that matter? As if to make some sort of point? I don't think we should strive to have a ton meeting of all 330 million American citizens, and to say that the United States isn't democratic if it doesn't do that is ridiculous!

@kiknchiknstudios8901

19 күн бұрын

@@bernardmulligan5504No it’s not. A democracy is ruled by majority. A republic is rulled according to a charter or constitution. Education is power. Use it.

@captain_context9991

19 күн бұрын

You can call it whatever you like... Its still a democracy. Just a very, very dysfunctional one. Calling it a republic, does nothing to excuse how poorly democracy works in the US.

And my old home DDR was neither a democracy nor a republic

@heiner71

19 күн бұрын

In name only.

@xxpvpmasterskillerproskyen514

19 күн бұрын

Die DDR war tatsächlich eine Republik, genau wie China auch heute noch eine Republik ist. Republik meint nur, dass das Staatsoberhaupt kein Monarch ist. Soweit ich weiß, haben sich die Obergrenzer im Politbüro nie zum Monarchen erklärt.

@DerekWitt

19 күн бұрын

Many countries that have “Democratic Republic” in their official names are anything but democratic. One current exception is perhaps Nepal. Its former official name was the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal. That said, it’s not so democratic. Still working out the kinks since deposing the king in 2008.

@Nils.Minimalist

19 күн бұрын

​@@DerekWitt... like North Korea who calls itself "democratic people's republic" 😂😂😂

@DerekWitt

19 күн бұрын

@@Nils.Minimalist yep. The most egregious example right there.

You likely are better educated in American political philosophy than a vast majority of the "bros" that leave the comments you mentioned.

@FelifromGermany

19 күн бұрын

I did get my minor in poltical science but this is actually something we learned in high school in 9th grade in Germany. I'm just confused as to where the misunderstanding comes from in the US that the country isn't a democracy. Especially since the US has been promoting democracy all over the world for deacdes. There's even a Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor: www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/under-secretary-for-civilian-security-democracy-and-human-rights/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/

@RealityHasAWokeBias

19 күн бұрын

@@FelifromGermany Because our education system is complete garbage and solely meant to prepare us to be a 9-5 obedient corporate drone while our government approves bombs to be sent to blow up Palestinian children and they expect us to be none the wiser. It's a messed up system.

@RealityHasAWokeBias

19 күн бұрын

@@FelifromGermany We have a very poorly constructed system of education in this country.

@timphelan2873

19 күн бұрын

@FelifromGermany it comes from a concerted effort by the right to change the narrative through spreading of propaganda and misinformation. These people vote, but the bottom line is they think their vote is more valid than "those people", who they'd rather not be given the chance to vote. It should just be "qualified" voters, who almost always tend to look like them. I'd love to see you go into a video on the conservative think tanks in this country and how they've worked to control and shift narratives on various topics ( like wealth inequality, Healthcare, gun regulation, climate, voter accessibility.) It's pretty incredible, but would certainly stir a big pot for your channel!

@78.BANDIT

19 күн бұрын

​@@RealityHasAWokeBiasNO it's the Teachers Unions and the fact they only teach to test.

I think the reason this comes up is because just about every person in the US gets told this as a "fun fact" or bit of trivia at some point. It's essentially the same thing as folk wisdom, it's just something everybody hears, and so it's something that just gets repeated over and over. As you point out, it's only true if the only thing you consider to be a "democracy" is a direct democracy.

A republuc if you can keep it. Ben Franklin

@TribalGuitars

19 күн бұрын

"Republic" was frequently used interchangeably with "nation" and "country" when the Constitution was ratified, and still is now.

@paulbrickler

19 күн бұрын

www.nps.gov/articles/000/constitutionalconvention-september17.htm "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" The question and the quote are often mistakenly repeated as 'a republic, or a democracy?', but apparently that is false. There was a lot of contention at the time over the idea of a 'pure' or 'direct' democracy or one with elected representative leaders, and they chose to go the route of the latter of the two.

@asmodon

19 күн бұрын

Meaning „not a monarchy“. That’s was his biggest concern and that’s all there is to it.

@stevenporter863

19 күн бұрын

US isn't a pure democracy: if it was Americans would be voting multiple times a day with every little law and detail. That is way there are representatives.

@corruptduboiscountyindiana5058

19 күн бұрын

did you know that ben wanted to ban germans from coming to america

I'm an American and a retired History professor. Congratulations! You know more about our country's political system than many Americans do. Yes, I think most Americans who insist we're not a democracy are thinking of a direct democracy. But as you correctly stated, we are a democratic republic. As a republic, representatives represent groups of citizens. And as a democracy, those representatives are elected by voting citizens. All this means that Americans (and Germans, et. al.) are democratic-republicans--which was actually the name of one of our 2 earliest political parties. How's that for confusing?! In my experience, Americans who say we're not a democracy hate the Democratic Party, so as a dig to that party, they insist the U.S. is not democratic.

@DaGo314

18 күн бұрын

Now i really doubt the fact that you were ever a teacher. If you study history, you'd know how dangerous it is or was for our founding father to throw the word "Democracy" around like a child wave around his father's gun he found. This isn't about whether or not we technically qualify as a form of "Democracy" but about highlighting the importance of the word "Constitutional Republic". any history teacher worth their salt would know why it's so damn important to drill this down to their students. Our founders had a deep disgust and open disdain for Democracies. by brainwashing people to only think of the US as a Democracy you're playing down the role of not only our system of governance but the US Constitution itself which was enshrined for the sole purpose of defend individual liberties Socrates was executed via Athenian Democracy after all. “It has been observed that a pure democracy, if it were practicable, would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this.” Alexander Hamilton

@ashleighelizabeth5916

18 күн бұрын

@@DaGo314 when you are speaking of our founders you might want to keep in mind that they decided blacks should be counted as 3/5ths of a person in order to give more representation to the white men that owned them, that they chose not to allow women to vote and that one of the qualifications they approved of to elect senators at the state level (and indirectly at the federal level) was that the person not only be a white male but that he own land as well. They may have been great men for their time but they were far from perfect and were certainly not the last word on what "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" actually should look like. Additionally people who most often throw around quotes about the Founders reviling democracy seem to also believe that they founded this country on Judeo-Christian beliefs despite the many quotes they left explicitly stated the opposite of that idea. Don't get it twisted, this argument most often has NOTHING to do with respecting constitutional tradition and everything to do with trying to gaslight voters into accepting the idea that it's perfectly justifiable for the numerical minority to govern and create policy that go against the will of the majority.

@dougbaker2755

18 күн бұрын

@DaGo314 Again, you are talking about a pure democracy. And, yes, many of our founders were nervous about the word "democracy" because they wanted to protect individual rights which the majority could not trample on. But that doesn't subtract from the fact that they created a democratic republic. Moreover, the tone of your comments is just so typical of many who take advantage of the anonymity on social media to be rude. Hope you're proud of your rude and disdainful attitude! We need more civility, not less, in this country.

@DaGo314

18 күн бұрын

@@dougbaker2755 I'm going to correct your massive misunderstanding here. We are a Republican Democracy not a Democratic Republic, those two are not the same. The word position matters, a Democrstic Republic is Communism that's why DPKR and China use it. A Republican Democracy it's Gagged Democracy to preserve individual freedoms. A democratic republic is a pure democracy that supercedes Republican principles. If you studied social and human interactions you'd understand that words are everything. You could argue that there are democratic principles within our republic but never ever waive the word democracy by its lonesome. That's why the words "Constitutional Republic are that important. You must highlight what comes first. That dilution is precisely what our forefathers feared and wrote so much about. This is why a lot of us and me included get mad at this type of nonsense.

@DaGo314

18 күн бұрын

@@ashleighelizabeth5916 that's a lot of word vomit if I ever saw an example. You said nothing of value, you vastly misconstrued the founding of.our nation and slandered it's principles. If you read the United States independiente you find race, sex isn't in anywhere. Our constitution part of the slaves was an addition not in the original and even that little addition was meant to prevent future slavery. If you read the whole thing, you'd notice that slavery was already illegal when ratified. The addition only created a cause of in case "slaves already exist". Your whole spiel stinks of fucking Communism ans mental retardation.how about you read our fucking founding documents first instead of making an ass out of yourself publicly because all you've show is that you hold deep disdain for the country and its founding.

The terms republic and democracy aren't even mutually exclusive. They don't even describe the same thing. Republic is a form of state, democracy is a form of government.

@jrgptr935

19 күн бұрын

Genau das hat Feli ja gesagt. Das sagen hier auch viele andere. Daß es offenbar notwendig ist, es zu sagen, verursacht ein sehr ungutes Gefühl. Etwas ähnliches sah ich vor kurzem: Jemand bezeichnete das Öffentlich-Rechtliche Fernsehen als staatliches Fernsehen (was es nicht ist) und nannte als Begründung dafür das Programm eines privaten und kommerziellen Senders. Oder man denkt an Leute, die als Reaktion auf eine Entyklika des Papstes zum Gericht gingen, um aus der Kirche auszutreten. Aus der protestantischen...

@hello-cn5nh

2 күн бұрын

State is government

Wait, what? This is a misconception? (From Australia) I thought any country were you vote for a parliament/representative (mp) that is conducted in a mostly free and fair manner is a democracy. (Turns out I was right, a republic is just a form of government, not how the government is appointed, democracy is the method in which how government is appointed) (I was taught in school btw on how our voting works in my country too and the definitions)

@Anon54387

18 күн бұрын

A republic and a democracy are different in that a democracy is where the majority gets its way and a republic where the majority does not always get its way such as where rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are concerned. Technically, a republic is a type of democracy, a special case of it as the mathematicians might say, but the differences are not trivial. It's why so many insist on pointing out the the USA is not a democracy. Democracy is mob rule.

@mattk6827

18 күн бұрын

Well if you want to be technical, when it comes to things like presidential elections in the US, the people don't directly vote for the president. The electoral college does. Not all states in the US require the electorates to vote with the majority of the state. A further case in point of this nation being a representative republic.

@KenLaunus

16 күн бұрын

@@Anon54387 Have you actually watched the video? A Repblic is not "technically" a type of democracy, it is a democracy as long as people have a free vote. Germany is also a democracy, but we are also a Republic, they ar not exclusive. China is also a republic, but not a democracy, thats where the US seems to headed with all the gerrymandering. Democracy is not mob rule, only if you have a direct democracy, but again you either haven´t watched or understood the video.

@beasley1232

15 күн бұрын

Technically we Americans don’t directly vote for our president. You see, each state is given a certain amount of electors which is actual people and those electors vote for the president. Known as “electoral votes”. Each state is given a certain amount of electoral votes based on their population, and the percentage they make of the US population. Example: Illinois has 19 electoral votes, Illinois voted for Democrats by 17% points in 2020, so all of Illinois 19 electoral votes go to Biden. Florida has 30 electoral votes, Florida voted for Trump in 2020 by 3.3% points so all of Florida’s 30 electoral votes go to Trump. In 2016, Trump lost the popular vote by 2% points nation wide, but he still won the election because he managed to capture 270 electoral votes.

In a world, where some people still believe the earth is flat, I‘m not surprised that they don‘t get the meaning of democracy. Thank you for your correct education Feli and hopefully at least some people are now understanding it.

Switzerland exactly is a semi-direct democracy. People can vote about laws and can change decisions (this is the direct part). But the "Bundesrat" (Exekutive) is selected by the parlament (indirect part). But you are not false, usually it is called as direct democracy.

@SamnitVirk

19 күн бұрын

Yes however calling it a direct democracy is misleading and they still do pass laws without referendum. So the correct term is semi direct democracy. However 2 of the cantons of Switzerland do practice proper direct democracy Glarus and Appenzell Innerrhoden where thousands gather every year to vote on issues

@SamnitVirk

19 күн бұрын

*Thousands gather every year to vote in the Landsgemeinden sorry

In the U.S. there is almost always a sub-text to the comment about being a republic and not a democracy. It is usually conservatives aiming to emphasize "states rights" and also asserting a right to rule without a majority. They don't usually say this explicitly, but this is what they mean. They believe that a minority of richer people should be able to block any reform that challenges their economic hegemony over everyone else. Factions such as the ammo-sexual crowd deploy the phrase to defend their extremist, absurd interpretation of the 2nd ammendment. Large majorities of American know that we need sensible gun regulation, but they want to block the will of the majority (democracy). Generally speaking in Amerian political discourse, when you hear some sort of opaque phrase there is a hidden agenda. (E.g., states rights, American exceptionalism, manifest destiny, "law and order," voter integrity, "big government", the list goes on......)

@Anon54387

15 күн бұрын

You know a sure way to determine one is arguing in an unhinged, emotional manner? It's when they use the term ammo-sexual. The 2nd Amendment is in the Bill of Rights, and is referred to as a right in the 2A itself but you guys claim it is merely a privilege contingent on membership in a militia. The militia is one reason for the right (cannot have a militia without privately owned weaponry), but like all rights it can be exercised in any way and to any extent that doesn't infringe the rights of others. It's why owning and carrying is legal, but murdering someone is not since that latter is an actual infringement of the rights of others. You might have noticed that the 2A speaks of the right as though it already exists. The right wasn't established by the 2A, nor where any of the other rights established by the Bill of Rights, rather it says government shall not infringed the right. Our Bill of Rights is based on the English Bill of Rights of 1689 in which there is a lot of familiar language about due process, free speech, trial by jury, right to property, etc. The Americans, though, had a broader conception of protection of rights so they made it more of a safeguard yet. The right to arms is a prime example of this. Specifically, the EBoR of 1689 says there is a right to such arms allowed by law. The Americans saw this was wide open for abuse of the right (simply outlaw all arms) effectively making it a privilege so they changed it to shall not be infringed. And free speech? The guarantee of it isn't nearly as strong in the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. In Australia, for example, their Constitution specifically recognizes free speech rights only for those currently in Parliament. For the rest it is more of a privilege, and their media has to be more careful what they say than ours just for that reason. Consider this sentence: A well informed Congress, being necessary to the wise operation of government, the right of the people to own and read books, shall not be infringed. So. Who has the right to books. All of the people or only those in Congress?

@Anon54387

15 күн бұрын

The difference between a republic and a democracy is that a republic has limits on what the government can do even if a majority wants it whereas in a democracy 51% get to run the show and there are no limits on the power so it is just another form of tyranny. If a tyrannical law exists it is just as tyrannical whether a king made that law or a legislature. If there is a law that says you cannot leave home except to work in whatever job the government decides you work in and cannot go to Yosemite on the weekends that's a violation of your rights whether a king made that law or an elected legislature. That's the importance of a republic, and the only reason you guys don't like a republican is that you, in your short sighted ways, don't like the idea of limits on government power that go along with it. You want a democracy so government can do whatever.

These are the people who failed social studies at high school.

Feli, I went to college at Stephen F. Austin State University in Nacogdoches, Texas -- the oldest town in Texas. One of the things I loved about Nacogdoches was its beauty. I remember the downtown area and the beautiful architecture. Little did I know that much of the town was designed by German immigrant, Diedrich A W. Rulfs. Check out this article and video. I think you'll like it: "Diedrich A.W. Rulfs: the German immigrant who became Nacogdoches’ master architect."

On the subject of forms of government in Europe, I think Andorra’s is among the more unique or unusual. Its co-princes are the Bishop of Urgell (Catalonia, Spain) and the President of France.

I think that we could use a symbolic/ceremonial head of state (not a monarch) separate from the president. BTW, the "head of government" in Canada is the Prime Minister (Justin Trudeau) and the "head of state" is King Charles III and his representative, the Governor General. The Governor General is effectively the head of state, as the King does not live in Canada.

@GeoffCB

19 күн бұрын

As in Australia and New Zealand. There's sometimes talk of Australia becoming a republic, but few want a directly elected President. So if it ain't broke...

@dougbrowning82

19 күн бұрын

Canada is a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy, with a bicameral parliament in the Westminster style.

OMG - Thank you!!! I hope everyone watches this!

The main reason that whole "it's not a democracy" line became popular is, it's a way for unserious people to rattle serious critics of public policy. It works because serious people care about accuracy.

@jonadabtheunsightly

19 күн бұрын

It's more because _modern_ government systems don't really directly fall under any of the major subject areas that we have classes for, but ancient ones clearly fall under history, so they have a class to get taught in; and history teachers *love* to cover Classical Greece. "Democracy" is generally taught in that context (usually with reference to Athens in particular). Americans do tend to get one class in "government" in high school, but it's often just a semester, and it tends to focus on American government specifically, so it doesn't necessarily devote a lot of time to general-purpose terminology or classification of modern governments.

@kingbeauregard

19 күн бұрын

@@jonadabtheunsightly You're not wrong about the formal definitions. I'm speaking more to why people bother to split hairs at all, and I saw it become a reflex among the Right starting in the 90s. Conversations would go something like: Liberal: Black Americans are underrepresented in politics. We live in a democracy, and so ... Conservative: Actually it's not a democracy, it's a constitutional republic. Liberal: (distracted onto this side discussion about definitions)

@tj92834

19 күн бұрын

The reason the "the US is not a democracy" line became popular is because the majority of Americans reject that: the European view of democracy is inimical to liberty and a free society. The term "democracy" here derives from the Federalist papers, where it was used for the few then-existent "democracies" in Europe. These days, Americans still colloquially use "democracy" to refer to European-style democracies (even if they have evolved) and "republic" to US-style democracy. I'm sorry if that confuses you, but "US liberal" doesn't actually mean "liberal" and "US conservative" doesn't actually mean "conservative" in the European sense either. Progressives have been trying to turn the US into a European-style democracy with unlimited, unconstrained powers for a century and the people you call "unserious" oppose that.

@jonadabtheunsightly

19 күн бұрын

@@kingbeauregard Pedants are going to be pedantic. If you can't figure out how to recover from being corrected (or _wrongly_ corrected even) on a minor technical point, you're never going to do well in debates, political or otherwise. I don't buy that just because someone got distracted by a pointless correction, distracting them from the real argument must necessarily have been the other person's goal in saying it.

@halvarf

19 күн бұрын

@@tj92834 "the European view of democracy is inimical to liberty and a free society." I am afraid to even ask what you understand by liberty and a free society that European citizens can't have because of their constitutions. My suspicion is that is has to do with bearing arms, hating on people, and, lately, maybe even owning slaves, while going to school as kids without having to fear being shot or any kind of human dignity are not part of that concept of liberty.

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." *Winston Churchill*

@leedoss6905

19 күн бұрын

😂

@azoutdoors2344

19 күн бұрын

😂 Dying laughing! Unfortunately, that's par for the course nowadays lol! However, people are now waking up because they're bank accounts are dwindling into nothing.

@TribalGuitars

19 күн бұрын

“Worst form of government except for all the others.” - Also attributed to Winston Churchill on democracy. No one knows if Winston actually said either of the statements.

@twenteeen

19 күн бұрын

@@azoutdoors2344 *their

@ClownWorldOrder

19 күн бұрын

So you think elections should be abolished?

You witness Germany, and America well. You're a classic example of what America even is. Glad to have ya!

I think the word “constitutional” in “constitutional republic” means that government powers are limited and not just that the country in question has a supreme legal document that supersedes all the other laws. It’s the opposite of the word “absolute” as in “absolute monarchy”. While it’s true that most, if not all, other democratic countries have constitutions that limit government powers to different extents, the limitation of government powers is not the indispensable part of democracy. You can have a perfectly democratic state with unlimited powers as long as it derives its powers from the majority. This is why the word “constitutional” in “constitutional republic” is so important; it sets a clear distinction between absolute and constitutional (limited) governments. You may replace the phrase with “constitutional representative democracy with non-royal head of state” and the meaning is still the same. This may sound a bit confusing to some since when they use the word “democracy” what they’re actually referring to is Western democracy, not any kind of democracy. Some of them might even go so far as to believe that Western democracy is the only kind of democracy, which is not true. Democracy in its naked form is only concerned with the origin of powers, not the amount of powers. It’s nothing more than majority rule in practice. What some people believe are the indispensable parts of democracy such as human rights, equality before the law, and separation of powers are in fact the elements of liberalism that have been carried over to Western democracy that might not be completely liberal; they are not the elements of democracy that have always been there. These liberal elements only came to be associated with democracy during the Age of Enlightenment which is separated from the time at which the first democratic government was established in Athens by thousands of years. Some Americans know this fact very well and tend to think that the word “democracy” without an adjective means pure democracy. As a result, they insist that the United States is a constitutional republic and not a democracy to emphasize that their country is not a pure democracy. By the way, direct democracy is not synonymous with pure democracy either. Representative democracy is as democratic as direct democracy. What sets them apart is the indirectness of the former, not the secondary characteristics one of them derives from any other ideology by doing which it makes itself impure.

@FelifromGermany

19 күн бұрын

Yes, that's certainly part of most constitutions! The constitution and the laws are part of the limitation of power or checks and balances (in addition to theselafation of power by the 3 government branches, a functioning opposition, free press, etc.). The protection of the individual rights of citizens and the rule of law (meaning that the government too has to stick to it and is never above the law) are key features of a functioning democratic system.

@DaGo314

18 күн бұрын

“It has been observed that a pure democracy, if it were practicable, would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this.” -Alexander Hamilton

The core text of this goes back to Number 39 of the Federalist Papers, which is often associated with James Madison (later the 4th President of the United States, under the current constitution). Conservatives have a particular reading of what is in Number 39 (originally issued as a pamphlet or an article to be included in printed newspapers). Conservatives want to stress that our US form of government is not merely "majority rule" but has limitations on how far the majority can "push" a minority. In that mindset, "democracy" was associated with the "majority rule", by "dictators" or "mob rule", while "republic" was to invoke limited (and small) government that responded to the needs and will of "real Americans" or "real Patriots". The current Constitution of the United States is exactly as you describe, a representative democracy to elect the officers of a federal republic as the form of government. This is the type of material that used to be taught in High School "Civics" classes, until those were eliminated in the 1980s under the Reagan Administration. You can also find it in "Great Books" or "Great Courses" types of materials. The commenters on your site who comment with this right-wing (America is a republic) phrase are just trying to issue a "put down" type of insult to silence you. The same as "YOU'RE so STUPID" or the ancient elementary school taunt of "your mother wears combat boots". The bully-style tactics of these commenters are trying to squeeze the discussion into their desired language and mind-set. Just use the truth, which you are doing. Good luck with the other slings and arrows of current post-modern, pro-strongman commenters. Don't let them get under your skin, because that's what they want.

@lddcavalry

13 күн бұрын

So I guess you’re a left wing extremist ? Where’s your tolerance for those that think differently than you?

Thank you doing a civics 101 for the confused in this country. It is appreciated. 😊

THE USA IS NOT A DEMOCRACY IT'S A REPUBLIC!!! Sounds for me like: -The F150 is not a car...it's a Ford!!! -The rabbit is not a mammal, it is a rodent!!! -The steak is not food, it is meat!!!

@asmodon

19 күн бұрын

Bingo

@axhed

19 күн бұрын

that person with a beard and a penis is not a man, it is a woman!

@RyanBischoffPercussion

19 күн бұрын

You can’t have a republic without democracy!!!!

@tillneumann406

19 күн бұрын

@@RyanBischoffPercussion Oh yes, you can. A republic is basically a non-monarchy, something without hereditary rulers. Just like a monarchy can be democratic, based on a constitution and with a monarch being head of state but not of government (say UK, Denmark, Norway, Sweden), a republic can be deeply undemocratic. The Soviet Union was a republic, Nazi Germany was a republic, China is a republic...though with North Korea, one can't be so sure any more since it's become a hereditary rule. Still I have the feeling that those who insist that the U.S. is not a democracy (after we've been bombarded with propagandist claims that it was the greatest democracy in the world for decades, and that it was thriving to make the rest of the world safe for democracy) have simply given up trying to justify the obvious shortcomings that the U.S. has in this regards. And rather than join the attempt to cure those, they rather tell the critics to p. o., since a "constitutional republic" doesn't need to be democratic. Those are the people who will probably still be happy when MAGA manages to abolish the remains of democracy as well. Bye-bye, "role model".

@axhed

19 күн бұрын

people are talking past each other in this discussion. the usa is not a direct democracy. politicians and media personalities routinely imply that it is.

You wrapped it up so well that I understood things unconsciously easier, thanks Feli!

Excellent explanation. This should be packaged and sold to every American school where this is either not taught at all or taught badly.

This is Meta AI.Germany is both a republic and a democracy. It is a federal parliamentary republic with a democratic system of government, where the citizens elect representatives to make decisions on their behalf. Germany's political system is based on the principles of democracy, which include: - Free and fair elections - Separation of powers (legislative, executive, and judicial) - Protection of individual rights and freedoms - Rule of law As a republic, Germany has a president as head of state, but the majority of executive power lies with the chancellor, who is the head of government. The government is accountable to the parliament (Bundestag), which is elected by the people. So, in short, Germany is a democratic republic, which means it combines elements of democracy and republicanism to ensure a fair, representative, and accountable system of government.

@josueveguilla9069

15 күн бұрын

Meta AI = Artificial Idiot

What I find incredible is that I’ve seen this subject debated a couple hundred times but Fell explained it far better than any explanation I’ve seen yet. Good work.

About teaching it in schools; maybe indirectly, but they do when teaching the Pledge of Allegiance. "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, " Edit: including this link - kzread.infocGdGWzbbgCQ?feature=share

@RyanBischoffPercussion

19 күн бұрын

Ok, but it doesn’t say “we’re not a democracy.” Cuz guess what? WE ARE A DEMOCRACY!

@asmodon

19 күн бұрын

That doesn’t teach you sh*t.

@bethm1394

19 күн бұрын

I was a bit surprised when she said it's not taught in schools because I could almost swear that I did learn this in school ("America isn't technically a democracy, it's a republic") 🧐 so I consider that it's completely plausible that other Americans also learned it in school (but, then again, maybe I just heard it at school form another student or something 😅)

@trevorcorkery

19 күн бұрын

how many times do people have to explain it? Just because we are a Republic does not mean we are not a democracy. All Democracies are Republics. Not all republics are democracies.

@asmodon

19 күн бұрын

@@trevorcorkery almost. The UK is a democracy. But it’s not a republic, it’s a constitutional monarchy.

"My Allegiance is to the Republic, Anakin. ....And I got the High-Ground." - Obi-Wan Kenobi

Feli, the online magazine Slate had a really good article on this issue back in 2020 with the headline "The Real Reason Why Republicans Keep Saying 'We’re a Republic, Not a Democracy'". It's worth checking because it effectively contextualizes the deliberately created confusion with regard to this issue.

@FelifromGermany

19 күн бұрын

Thanks for sharing!

@shanekeenaNYC

19 күн бұрын

​@@FelifromGermanyThe US is a constitutional republic, albeit with democratically aligned, liberal institutions that have expanded over time. Too much of a narrow, structured government and groups fall through the cracks. Too bloated and without structure, and the genuinely successful get weighted down. The point of government ought to be that it makes everyone who lives under it a better person. Same as private industry, for what it is worth. Yes, there are maximums and excesses, but not to target you personally, but simply in recognition of specific patterns that I have come to seeas a native born American citizen, I tend not to take too kindly to when those from other countries attempt to define my own society. The best form of knowledge is always first hand and

@bishop51807

19 күн бұрын

​​@@shanekeenaNYC This country was built by "Outsiders," one of our greatest Monument came from France and our massive nuclear powered Navy was thanks to a Polish immigrant. Heck the scientist who helped us get to the moon was German like Ms Feli. Only a handful of people can trace their DNA lineage back to the first colonists. Anybody who truly loves this country and calls it home has every right to call for change, that includes Mrs FelI.

@origionalwinja

19 күн бұрын

slate is a radical leftist rag that got it mostly wrong. it was in fact a very bad take, as is everything from slate

@uhohhotdog

19 күн бұрын

@@shanekeenaNYCa republic is a democracy

This nonsense about the US not being a democracy comes from right wing media. Being a democracy and a constitutional republic are NOT mutually exclusive. Yes we're a democracy. Thank you for pointing this out.

@JBguitar-cj8pc

3 күн бұрын

Lmao given where we’re at now, I don’t think we need to be whining about “right wing media” lol fuckin goofball 🤡

@kronosaraya

3 күн бұрын

Why am I not surprised...

I guess some don’t pay attention in school. At least you tried to teach, tell and communicate the truth. Thanks! Keep up with interesting videos.

They try to play the same games with variants of the word, “fascism”, as if its definition is highly technical, and as if anything that doesn’t fit some rigid definition is somehow innocuous or even beneficent. In truth, it’s a political word, constantly redefined on the fly, by whoever among the self-serving is applying it to themselves. For those self-serving purposes, such users are often intentionally vague about what they mean by the word, in terms of what specific actions they espouse, and in terms of whether they embrace or reject the word. And yes, the word, “fascism”, has sometimes been used by others to mean little more than, “something bad”, or even, “something with which I disagree”, but there is, in fact, a great deal of political activity in the world that meets any reasonable, broad, informal definition of the word, and even more technical definitions. The word, “fascia”, means “bundle of sticks”, or “bundle”. In human terms, political terms, it refers to a small select group of individuals who are gathered as one, as the only “true members” of a nation, and therefore entitled to be the only ones to enjoy the benefits of being part of the nation, and being the only ones able to and entitled to force their will upon others. This can be the actual practice, or merely an aspiration. Right, wrong, truth, lie are defined less by the quality of the behavior or assertion and more by who the actor is. Any given behavior is right when a member or supporter of the fascia does it, and wrong when anyone else does it. Everything said by us is truth because it’s us saying it. It doesn’t even matter if what we say contradicts what we’ve said before. That’s all fairly broad, and can be applied to a small degree or to very extreme degrees, depending upon the needs of the fascia at the moment. For all the emphasis on the collective that “bundle” or “fascia” implies though, the only consistent measure of what’s “good for the nation” is what serves the interests of the strongman leader of the nation-and it usually is just one leader, with perhaps a few figureheads or henchmen also at least nominally recognized as leaders. Because the fascia and the leader are always right, physical might is allowable and even required against all others, either to achieve specific ends, or to simply assert and maintain power. Often, but not always, race and or land of ancestral origin determines who is part of the nation/bundle/fascia, but other supporters of the “nation” may be treated, in some or all ways, as members. Conversely, those who are of the chosen race or ethnicity can be effectively banished if in disagreement with the whims of the leader(s) who are the only recognized voice of what is good for the narrowly defined “nation”. The Merriam-Webster definition: fascism noun fas·​cism ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi- Synonyms of fascism 1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition 2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control What is espoused by the far right in the US right now clearly meets the second definition, and differs from the first only in that it may, in some ways, allow power to at least appear somewhat decentralized, spread across branches of government and among those at the federal, state, and local levels. In truth, the goal is to have all these ostensibly separate entities in line with what rulers want.

@Anon54387

8 күн бұрын

A democracy is mob rule which is its own form of tyranny. If there is a law that infringes rights it matters not if it was the edict of a king or passed by a democratic legislature. This is where the importance of a republic is since it places limits on government power. Our system basically is that government is only supposed to do those things which it is expressly allowed to do, it's why we had to amend the Constitution to allow for an income tax and to prohibit alcohol. In addition, there is an express list of things government cannot do even if a majority might want it in our Bill of Rights. When the majority does not always get its way one cannot say that is a democracy. In fact, if you read the Constitution it doesn't refer to it as a democracy. It says it is a republic. Now, in light of that, you are saying that those who remind we are a republic are authoritarians and fascists yet those who'd rather people forget we area republic ie who want majority rule with no limits somehow aren't authoritarian. You guys have it exactly backwards or, at the electronics engineers put it, 180 degrees out of phase.

@vincegay986

5 күн бұрын

@@Anon54387 You appear to have done some extremely limited reading on what you’re talking about. Most of what you say assumes that government and populace are entirely separate and opposed to one another, when, under all but the most autocratic rule, they are overlapping and intertwined, as are many of their various interests. Though my comment is on a completely different topic, and you are putting a lot of words in my mouth, I’ll push back to assert that the US is, in fact, a liberal democratic republic, a representative democracy. At least, that is what most of its people aspire toward. Regardless of what specific descriptive words are used in the Constitution, a liberal democratic republic/representative democracy-by definition, neither “mob rule” nor a guarantee that the majority always gets what it wants, the way it wants it-is exactly what the US Constitution prescribes. A liberal representative democracy attempts to recognize the will of the majority, while balancing momentary whims of the populace with larger and longer-term concerns, and with respect for individual rights, including the rights of political and other minorities and of individuals who may not be able to have a say in how the government is run. It gives the populace voice in choosing representatives and leaders who may also appoint agency heads and a judiciary and/or approve appointments. The public may also be given a role in directly shaping some areas of policy and law. Since there is no individual right to do whatever one wants, and no right to disregard the rights of others, such “rights” cannot be “violated”. And while there is an ongoing effort to rule by law, rather than fiat, individuals, other private entities, and government are considered, at any given moment, to possibly possess rights which have yet to enumerated, either because they have yet to be at issue, or because they have yet to be settled by law, judicial rulings, or generally accepted practice. Other rights, such as a presumed right to privacy, are recognized as existing in shadows and penumbras, within and across existing laws, enumerated rights, and longstanding accepted practice. Recognized rights are also understood to formally or informally expand, as present and historic restrictions become increasingly difficult to justify, in light of the burdens they may impose, and in light of social, political, economic, and technological progress, as well as increased knowledge. Laws and Constitutional provisions, neither of which can possibly be used to micromanage everything in the public sphere, also allow for specialized regulatory rules, protocols, and procedures which do not necessarily have to be subject to public or legislative vote, or judicial ruling. A rule, protocol, or procedure which is found to impose undue burdens or impinge on rights, can be subjected to public vote, legislative consideration, or judicial decision at any time. Laws also evolve on a case by case basis, as issues raised by laws are brought before courts. While virtually all government involves the use of physical violence, at least for public protection and/or for when other means of enforcement of laws and rules fail, fascism tends to equate what is right with can be accomplished by physical might, and to respect only the rights and whims of those able and willing to exert force.

Half of the responses in this comments section did not even watch the video...

@Anon54387

18 күн бұрын

I think we know our own governmental system. We've literally been learning about it from 1st grade through 12th and some of us through college as well. We certainly don't need a German to explain it to us.

@Intranetusa

18 күн бұрын

​@@Anon54387 Our educational system and college often teaches us only the superficial aspects of US civics and government. People who call the USA a democracy and people who say the USA is not a democracy but a republic are both partially wrong. In order to know what the USA is, you need to read the Federalist Papers, which isn't taught in college or K-12. The Founding Fathers wrote in the Federalist Papers that they disliked pure democracy (which they described as citizens directly making decisions, which is called direct democracy today) and they wanted impure democracy in the form of a republic (which they described as a system of voters electing leaders who make decisions, which is called a representative democracy today). So a more accurate description is the United States is not a direct democracy, but a type of representative democracy in the form of a constitutional republican democracy. The USA is a representative democracy, constitutional republic, democratic republic, and republican democracy. All of those terms accurately describe what the United States have. This is in contrast to an authoritarian Republic (modern mainland China and the USSR), Republic/Republican democracy without a constitution (ancient Roman Republic), direct democracy with a written Constitution (ancient Athens), and representative democracy with Constitutional monarchy (United Kingdom).

@Holilo7

18 күн бұрын

​@@Anon54387 A lot of people don't seem to know if you look at the comments.

@josueveguilla9069

15 күн бұрын

How so?

When I was a kid I was taught in school that the U. S. is a Democratic Republic 🤷‍♀️

@BGCflyer

19 күн бұрын

…that’s what I learned in the Navy as well.

@kar460

19 күн бұрын

Same in school

@ashleighelizabeth5916

18 күн бұрын

We all were. This is a relatively new problem along with the idea that Nazis weren't far right but far left because they were socialist (which they were not). It's all part of a specific political agenda to justify the actions of one group while demonizing the actions of another.

Kudos, Feli, you bravely poked the beehive. Now watch your subscriber numbers.

Feli, the problem arises mostly as a result of very little of what Europeans, Canadians, Australians, etc would call civics or government or public affairs being taught at all in the US public education system. When my then 10-yr old son began school in the US, he knew more about the US system of government (from his classes in England) than did his American classmates.

I think the misunderstanding literally comes from saying The Pledge of Allegiance in school EVERY MORNING for 12 years. “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of American and to the Republic for which it stands” I imagine saying that small line every day for years stuck harder than the one week we spent covering what a democratic republic was one week in Government in high school. It’s a bummer.

You always do such a great job on these kind of videos.

It's new to me, and I'm 69 yrs. old. My theory is that it's a very new development linked to new right-wing calls for an authoritarian leader. "Republic" just means that there are representatives (supposedly) representing groups of people, usually geographically -- but it doesn't technically require that representatives be elected by the populace; they could be appointed (as they are in North Korea) by an authoritarian or a dominant political party. The US and Germany are both democratic republics, specifying that the representatives are democratically elected. IMO, it's very important to specify how the "people's representatives" attain power, and I categorically prefer that representatives are democratically elected.

@Anon54387

8 күн бұрын

The founders of this nation won a hard fought war to separate from a monarchy. The last thing they wanted to do was to, so to speak, jump out of the frying pan and into the fire. A legislature can infringe rights as much as a monarch can. And there, in a nutshell, lies the difference between a democracy and a republic. A republic has strict limits on government power so that individual rights are not infringed. In a democracy, 51% could decide to take someone's property without compensation. It's mob rule. As the saying went, they didn't want to trade one tyrant thousands of miles away in King George III for thousands of tyrants one mile away. Look at the Bill of Rights. It's a list of things government cannot do. Given this, the tyrannical nature of democracies, it's really ironic that you say those who point out we are a republic have an authoritarian streak to them. The opposite is true, those who IGNORE we are a republic and constantly refer to our system as a democracy are the authoritarians, they hate that a republic places limits on government power. Give our Constitution a read. It refers to our government as a republic, not once does it say it is a democracy. The founders were very fearful of a democracy. Read their writings, they said as much. Democracy is mob rule. The Supreme Court is decidedly undemocratic. They don't work for the majority, they don't work for the Congress, they don't work for the President, their job is to consider nothing other than whether the law being challenged in court is something the government is allowed to do. Granted, that takes courage they don't always have, but that is the ideal. Just because the ideal isn't always lived up to doesn't make the system itself worthless. I'm not trying to be rude when I say this, but if this is honestly the first you've heard of any of this your school horribly failed you.

American here... we learned that we're both a "representative, constitutional republic", as well as being democratically elected by the people. Except, we have the insanity of the Electoral College, which is insanely outdated.

@martinhafner2201

19 күн бұрын

Study it some more. The electoral college was necessary to get the small population states to join. Remove it and they'll leave because otherwise they will be effectively enslaved. There is a more accurate version of the electoral college using better math developed by/for political science, but the concept remains the same. The tuning is just better. We could move to that. I do believe most of the necessary combinatorics were developed after the founding of the U.S., so they couldn't have known the correct math. They did pretty well for a pre-theory solution.

It’s astounding to me how many people comment without watching the video.

@kensmith5694

19 күн бұрын

You are too easily astounded.

@asmodon

19 күн бұрын

@@kensmith5694 you may be right about that.

@CountAdolfo

10 күн бұрын

it's astounding to me how even the title of this video is false information

@kensmith5694

10 күн бұрын

@@CountAdolfo You are wrong about it. Learn what the words mean.

@asmodon

10 күн бұрын

@@CountAdolfo Whoever taught you otherwise was wrong. Her definitions are according to political science.

Yes good explanation , nice to see your channel coming on .I have been looking since almost the beginning, take care...

@lawrenceburchett7411

19 күн бұрын

What you must and I say must , do to even begin to understand the USA is read the preamble to the Constitution , multiple times .And to know when it is not on display it is kept in a vault that is virtually Nuke proof , that is how we feel about our Freedoms ...no kidding...

I think much of the confusion in the US is due to the phrase " and to the republic for which it stands" in the pledge of allegiance. With people not understanding a country can be both.

so refreshing to hear someone with 1. a solid education and foundation in logical/rational thinking; and 2. a view from outside the USA, not yet infected by the two warring factions inside the USA. Betreff: Deine Frage, oje. geh da nix hin, du werdest als einer dieser beiden eingestuft.

Some of America's Founding Fathers wrote disparagingly about "democracies," and some conspiracy minded modern Americans misunderstand. The Founders were talking about direct democracies where the entire citizenry votes directly on laws and policies. THIS is indeed a potential problem, as it could lead to a "tyranny of the majority." But you are correct, and your observations are definitely needed, that America IS a representative democracy.

@Intranetusa

18 күн бұрын

Correct. The Founding Fathers wrote in the Federalist Papers that they disliked pure democracy (which they described as citizens directly making decisions, which is called direct democracy today) and they wanted impure democracy in the form of a republic (which they described as a system of voters electing leaders who make decisions, which is called a representative democracy today).

@beasley1232

15 күн бұрын

@@Intranetusayes, however in the early days of the nation Americans were unable to elect their senator until after the civil war.

@josueveguilla9069

15 күн бұрын

​@@IntranetusaCorrection: Constitutional Republic. Not a "democracy".

@Intranetusa

15 күн бұрын

@@beasley1232 Yes, those federal senators were originally elected by state legislators, who in turn were elected by citizens. So the USA had a combination of different ways to get leaders, including: citizens electing leaders, citizens electing leaders who elected other leaders, and elected leaders appointing leaders. I believe state elected leaders electing federal leaders had more to do with federalism (balance and preservation of states rights vs federal rights) rather than republicanism (a system of non-hereditary representatives ruling the people). IIRC, the ancient Roman Republic that invented the idea of the republic had citizens directly electing leaders, leadings being appointed, etc. but they didn't have something like the electoral college. Overall, we classify them as representative democracies thanks to representatives ruling + citizens electing most of the leaders either directly or indirectly.

@Intranetusa

15 күн бұрын

@@josueveguilla9069 A Constitutional Republic with elections of leaders is a type of government that falls under representative democracy. This is in contrast to an authoritarian Constitutional Republic without elections such as mainland China and the USSR (both of those countries have Constitutions, are Republics ruled by appointed representatives, but have no real elections). Thus, the USA is a representative democracy in the specific form of a democratic Constitutional Federal Republic, but is not a direct democracy.

You did a very good job of explaining the different government systems.

@sunnydays8270

19 күн бұрын

Did she? I heard her say Germany and the US are the same, and they are not.

@chitlitlah

19 күн бұрын

​@@sunnydays8270 Did you miss the part where she explained that Germany is a parliamentary democracy where parliament elects a chancellor while the United States is a presidential democracy where the people elect a president? Or did you get hung up on the fact that both countries are indeed constitutional democratic republics?

@asmodon

19 күн бұрын

⁠@@sunnydays8270 Feli is completely correct. Germany and the US are both constitutional federal representative democratic republics. The US is a presidential system not the parliamentary system like Germany, the voting system is different (proportional vs. first past the post). Every democracy uses a different system. That doesn’t stop them from beeing a democracy y

@toddhouston4523

18 күн бұрын

@@sunnydays8270 She said that Germany and the USA are both a democracy and a republic. She didn’t say they were the same. I rewatched the video to see if I missed something.

Only two parties, the number of MPs does not correspond to the size of the individual federal states, and on top of that the Electoral College: a democracy with limitations.

The distinction is important versus a direct democracy, particularly in the US where the people do not directly elect the President, but actually vote for a slate of electors (though our ballots have us choose a Presidential candidate, thus indicating which electors) who then vote for the President. Each state gets a certain number of electors. States individually determine how electors are chosen, save for restrictions in the US Constitution. Some of our presidential elections yield a president where the national popular vote disagrees with the vote from electors. This is important because the political left in this country crowds itself into large city centers, mostly on the coasts, and boasts a slightly higher national population than the rest of us. If we directly elected the president, only the left would ever win. As far as the president goes, it would be a tyranny of the majority. If you've observed, the political left in the US wants to abolish the electoral college. The above is the reason why.

An excellent explanation. Thank you Feli.

Most people I've encountered who say "we're not a democracy, we're a constitutional republic" are conservatives who (a) love the Electoral College and (b) tend towards authoritarianism and WISH the US wasn't as democratic as it is.

@Anon54387

18 күн бұрын

Hogwash. It's the left that's constantly trying to increase the power of government. Hochul, after Bruen, signed a law that runs afoul of a number of the amendments in the Bill of Rights. It's the leftists trying to tell us what cars to drive, how to heat and cool our homes, even that we shouldn't be using natural gas stoves, business taxes and regulations that make it harder to enter the marketplace, the left is not in any supportive of a free market economy.

@marksaleski9890

18 күн бұрын

This is exactly right.

@Fliegerabwehrkanone-re1ty

18 күн бұрын

that's painting with a broad brush.... not every conservative is pro authoritarian....

@stephenrodgers5672

16 күн бұрын

​@@Fliegerabwehrkanone-re1tynot every Democrat is pro democracy.

@josueveguilla9069

15 күн бұрын

​@@Fliegerabwehrkanone-re1tyOnly SJWs/Cultural Marxists are both pro-authoritarian and pro-totalitarian.

I'll admit i havent read all 2k comments so this may have already been said. The confusion is that constitutionally we do not actually elect the president of the USA. In the USA we refer to our form of democracy as a "democratic republic" because the president is elected through the electoral college. While it is customary for each state to submit their electoral college votes in accordance with the votes of their people, it is not technically required. Each state is alloted a number of electoral college votes, and it is up to the states how their votes are decided. This varies by state. The important distinction here is that while yes, we pull the lever to "vote" for who we want to be the president, it is only used to inform our states how we would like them to cast the electoral college votes. We do not actually vote for the president. In fact, we dont even vote for the electoral college. Each state determines on their own how those electoral college votes are decided. Please note, I am NOT correcting you, and definitely not arguing. I'm only responding from an American perspective as to what we mean when we say this and why we are taught this in school. This was a great video, with great information. I always enjoy watching your videos and hearing your perspectives. Keep up the great work!

@rkaruschkat

8 күн бұрын

After reading many of these crazy comments, I just want to re-emphasize that this was an amazing video, and you nailed it!

Also, as a side note, the terms democracy and monarchy are also not mutually exclusive. The UK or Norway, for example, are both parliamentary Monarchies, meaning their head of state is not an elected president but a hereditary monarch, but they are also democracies because the people elect representatives into parliament which makes all the laws, while the monarch only has representative functions (like the German president). If we think about a non-democratic monarchy, what we mean is an absolute monarchy where the monarch holds all the power. This was the case in pre-revolutionary France, for example, or today in Saudi Arabia. The only absolute Monarchy to exist in Europe today is the Vatican State, although its monarch, the Pope is not a hereditary monarch but is elected by the Cardinals for life. On the other hand, there are republics who are not democracies because they may not have a monarch but a president but are ruled dictatorial. China, for example, wouldn't be counted as a democratic state by most people butnit is a republic. The same applies to historic states like the Third Reich, for example.

@stewartkingsley

11 күн бұрын

The UK is a constitutional monarchy.

@shimanopetermann9068

11 күн бұрын

@@stewartkingsley Again, those terms are not mutually exclusive. A constitutional monarchy can also be a parliamentary monarchy. Constitutional just means that the monarchs power is bound to a constitution, which is the case in all parliamentary monarchies. Parliamentary only means that the executive is elected by and dependent on parliament. That is definitely the case in the UK. The UK is actually often described as the "motherland of parliamentarism" which has been a role model for most if not all parliamentary systems today - monarchies and republics alike.

As I was taught in high school in the early 1970s it is a "Democratic Republic". Our pledge of allegiance says Republic.

@3catsn1dog

19 күн бұрын

They used to make us learn these things in school. They had a wooden paddle too.

@uhohhotdog

19 күн бұрын

A republic is a democracy

@natalig099

19 күн бұрын

​@@uhohhotdog China and Iran are non-democratic republics.

@tillneumann406

19 күн бұрын

@@uhohhotdog [darth vader mode]NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO![/darth vader mode] See the other posts correctly making quite a distinction...which doesn't mean at all that I'm with those who suddenly deny that the U.S. is meant to be a democracy.

@josueveguilla9069

15 күн бұрын

​@@uhohhotdogNo, it's not.

"I don't own a dog, I own a Border Collie!"

@carolforsythe6316

19 күн бұрын

A human in dog's clothing !

@Anon54387

18 күн бұрын

The distinction, though, between a democracy and a republic is not trivial. Democracy is literally mob rule. And sometimes a republic is actually "anti-democratic" because the majority doesn't get its way when enumerated rights are infringed.

Who are these people that don’t think we have a democracy? 🤦🏼

@Intranetusa

18 күн бұрын

They are the people who don't understand the difference between direct democracy/pure democracy (eg. ancient Athens having citizens directly make decisions) vs representative democracy/impure democracy (eg. ancient Roman Republic having citizens vote for leaders who make decisions).

What is it called when corporations own the "elected representatives" AND the judiciary, and control the governmental process so that they profit, exclusive of all other considerations? I don't think it's either of those choices.

Nah, it's not - it's a corporate oligarchy. Dollars speak a million times louder than votes.

@trevorcorkery

19 күн бұрын

lol... another person who can't comprehend one definition doesn't need to be the only one. What you say might be true, but that has zero bearing on whether we are a Republic/Democracy. People are morons these days.

@josueveguilla9069

15 күн бұрын

​@@trevorcorkery Nice gaslighting.

@trevorcorkery

13 күн бұрын

@@josueveguilla9069 nice job being a simpleton

That you even have to explain this is mind-boggling. We learned the distinction of different political systems and statehoods in 9th grade

@ashleighelizabeth5916

18 күн бұрын

Yep, even earlier than that in some cases. But they dedicated an entire class to teaching us this stuff in the 9th grade. It's either the profoundly ignorant who chose to sleep through those classes, or the willfully obtuse who have a political agenda they are trying to push with this concept.

@CountAdolfo

10 күн бұрын

she's wrong... so... um...

U.S. citizens vote for a given president... The Electorate (part of the representatives) elect the president, usually based upon vote... BUT not always.

You tell ‘em!!!! People just want to be right or feel like what they know can’t be explained further. 💁🏻‍♀️

You're 100% correct. We are a democratic republic. That was like lesson one in middle school social studies. Amazing how so many have forgotten this.

@Testing-123

19 күн бұрын

Please, tell me you are not American...the USA is not a democratic republic.

@FelifromGermany

19 күн бұрын

The funny things is that we learned this in 9th grade in Germany 😅 So you're not too far off there.

@Testing-123

19 күн бұрын

@@FelifromGermany Democratic Republics were based on Marxism and Leninism. America has never called itself a "Democratic Republic" whereas, East Germany did.

@asmodon

19 күн бұрын

@@Testing-123 Do you have fair and free elections in the US? Yes? Congratulations you have a democracy.

@mattk6827

18 күн бұрын

@@FelifromGermany Then you both learned wrong. Sorry.

It's a democracy! It's a _republic!_ IT'S A DEMOCRACY! IT'S A *REPUBLIC!!* Relax kids, you're both right. It's a democratic republic.

@AngelaVEdwards

19 күн бұрын

But in a pure democracy, ANYTHING can be voted away by the majority, including your rights to your own property. Our system protects many of our rights which cannot be voted away and the government cannot remove. I don’t like calling the USA a democracy because it really isn’t. Yes we vote on some things but there are other things we cannot vote on such as the five distinct rights given to us in the First Amendment.

@Intranetusa

18 күн бұрын

@@AngelaVEdwards The USA is not a direct democracy but is a type of representative democracy in the form of a democratic Constitutional Republic. The Founding Fathers who wrote the Constitution (James Madison) wrote in the Federalist Papers that they disliked pure democracy (which they described as citizens directly making decisions, which is called direct democracy today) and they wanted impure democracy in the form of a republic (which they described as a system of voters electing leaders who make decisions, which is called a representative democracy today). The USA is a representative democracy, constitutional republic, democratic republic, and republican democracy - all of those terms accurately describe what the United States have. This is in contrast to an authoritarian Republic (modern mainland China and the USSR), Republics/Republican democracy without a constitution (ancient Roman Republic), direct democracy with a written Constitution (ancient Athens), and representative democracy with Constitutional monarchy (United Kingdom). The USA adopted a written Constitution like the ancient [direct democracy] Athens and adopted voting for leaders that rule like the ancient [representative democracy] Roman Republic.

@AngelaVEdwards

18 күн бұрын

@@Intranetusa We have a democratic process with some of our elections. But calling the entire thing "A Democracy" is just plain wrong and that's what Feli and others in these comments are doing.

@Intranetusa

18 күн бұрын

@@AngelaVEdwards Calling it a direct democracy or implying it is a direct democracy is plain wrong. Calling it specifically a representative democracy is perfectly fine, because a federal republic with democratic elections is a subcategory under representative democracy. So people should always put the word "representative" in front of the word democracy when talking about the USA.

@AngelaVEdwards

17 күн бұрын

@@Intranetusa I agree.

The word 'democracy' is like the word 'vehicle.' There are many different vehicles of course. Trains, planes and automobiles come to mind. If something loud and noisy passes by my house and my wife asks me what it was and I say 'A loud vehicle went by' well, that doesn't really say much. She'd look at me as if I had a 3rd eye. Was it a plane? a train? etc. But if I say 'A large tractor-trailer went by', I have more specifically answered her question. In this regard, saying the US is a democracy is insufficient. It is a 'Constitutional, Federal Republic.'

yeah a lot of what people say in these debates are, to me, splitting hairs. What people are forgetting is that terminology, especially political terminology, changes over time. The word "republic" comes from "res publica" which is Latin for "A Public Thing". If a government is publicly a thing, that could just as easily describe democracy. I've heard the US described as a democratic republic, or federal democratic republic. Or a constitutional presidential federal democratic republic......yeah. Even if the federal government is (as it is described) is a "federation" instead of a unitary republic it's still a democracy. Today's definition of "democracy" is universal suffrage, basically and by law, everyone can vote at 18. Even though the federal government is not wholly or directly democratic, per se, the states and local governments still require direct participation to function, as they have a lot of referenda or plebiscites, and the officials are elected directly, like state governors; as opposed to the presidency which is elected via an electoral college (whose electors are elected by the People).

Well explained, Feli. Sad (and indeed scary) that the level of civic education in the USA is so abysmal!

@kensmith5694

19 күн бұрын

Imagine that it is on purpose and then be frightened. It is easy to take away rights if people don't know they have them.

@DaGo314

18 күн бұрын

how about you pick up a book and read what happened to Socrates in ancient Greece?

@davidkemble6014

18 күн бұрын

@@DaGo314 Yes, democracies can go rotten and succumb to the prejudices of majorities. That’s why in our constitutional republic the minority protections of the Bill of Rights and the post-Civil War constitutional amendments are so important. But constitutional protections are only as good as the legal willingness to uphold them and we’re currently backsliding in this regard. But all of this has nothing to do with recent right-wing assertions about the importance of distinguishing between a “republic” and a “democracy,” does it?

@javierwa

17 күн бұрын

One of my first shocks from living in the US was realizing how little children learn about the world in school.

@kensmith5694

17 күн бұрын

@@javierwa It surprises me how little they learn, full stop. Flat earthers, moon landing deniers and "free energy" scams are evidence for this.

What irritates Europeans most is probably not the sudden confusion between "republic" and "democracy" in the recent discussion in the U.S., but the lasting conflation of "democracy" and "capitalism". The U.S. is probably the only country in the world where "capitalism" has a positive connotation rather than being an expletive for a market-based system that's gone haywire, and it seems obvious that a society in which money is king (capital-ism) cannot at the same time have a real rule of the people (demo-cracy).

Love the explanation and believe it or not, depending on where you live in the US can be how you are taught our system of government. In the North and West (with a few exceptions), it is taught as a Democratic Republic. In the Central and South, they remove Democratic. There are also folks in the South that don’t believe the Confederacy lost the Civil War. There are elected representatives who believe the Earth is flat. We have a rather inept system where people believe they are voting for their representatives but they are just voting for a representative (electorate) that then casts a vote. The electorate usually votes along the popular vote line, but there are instances where they have not. In 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016 the popular vote did not win the presidency. The last two are still hard to comprehend for Centrists.

Hi Feli, this was great. As a former social studies teacher in K-12 and now a university professor focusing on moral and political literacy for school leaders, this was refreshing. I feel a lot of the insistence comes from the nuance you mentioned. The understanding that democracy is a much broader term than simply "pure democracy," and that republics function democratically, is key. Historically and etymologically, "republic" was a Roman term and "democracy" was a Greek term, referring to distinct styles of involving the common people in politics. However, if a speaker of Latin were to ask someone who spoke Koine Greek, "Hey, what’s the word you guys over there use for our word ‘republic’?" the Hellenistic friend would have likely said, "Hmm, yeah, we have something like that. We use the word ‘democracy’." (Lol) I also think this insistence on the US being either/or instead of both/and comes from the current political divide. It’s a rhetorical device that can often, though not always, give insights into the personal partisan leanings or regional political cultures in which people grew up. Republicans or others who are conservative may have a tendency to say the US is not a democracy but a republic. Democrats or other liberally oriented people might see a rhetorical benefit in saying the US isn’t a republic but a democracy. This aligns the words to the terms that most closely match their partisan affiliation. A short look back into the founding of the US shows that no such distinction was made. Yes, the Federalist Papers state a hard no when it comes to direct or pure democracy, and therefore they leaned into the word republic (but as a form of representative democracy). For example, one only has to look at one of the earliest political parties we had here. When members of the Jeffersonian Republican Party were discussed by Federalists of the time, they were almost always referred to as the Democratic Party. Most modern historians and scholars have for years referred to this party as the Democratic-Republican Party, which indicates at least some sort of shared ideology between the two concepts. Anyway, just to say, you did a very good job discussing this in a well-informed way. Thank you.

excellent video! political education is so important!

PLEASE HELP! My brother in law works for Disney and goes to Germany in Sept. He does software programming and I’m not tech savvy at all. Any recommendations for German tech phrase book for English speakers type books? I’ve got the travel/everyday phrase books covered, but I don’t know about computers or even if such a book exists. Would greatly appreciate any help. Vielen Dank!

Hi Feli That word doesn't exist in our founding laws anywhere in the DOI, USC and our BOR It's mentioned in the federalists papers 9 or 10 times on why we are not going to be one. 🇺🇸 😀 My mothers family - we can trace her back to the 17 century in Berlin. We have been here since 1846 🇩🇪 🤗 🇩🇪

I know that I said that the US isn't a real democracy for a lack of pluralism because there are only two parties who have a chance. But it's still allowed to have or vote for other parties (as far as I know), so there's the pluralistic aspect. But saying it's not a democracy because it's a republic? That's kinda like comparing apples and oranges, isn't it? A republic can be democratic or autocratic or some other things. It's not in the same category as a democracy so one doesn't necessarily say anything about the other.

Awesome explainer! Lots of Americans get this wrong....

Thank you Feli for the quality of your videos, and the courage to dare tackle such a subject and bravely respond to this tidal wave of political, populist and extremist comments. Some people thank you for having been educated and intellectually stimulated, fortunately!👏💪

There is a difference; Greece was a democracy and fell apart pretty quickly, Rome was a republic lasted quite a while. We are a democratic Republic.

We used to elect State legislators who then elected Senators, until the 17th Amendment made Senate elections by popular vote.

@michaelmaiara4770

19 күн бұрын

That is because originally, the House of Representatives was to be the house of the people and the Senate was to be the house of the states.

@TribalGuitars

19 күн бұрын

Governors also had a say in who got to be a senator.

@ClownWorldOrder

19 күн бұрын

What point do you think you're making?

@xCaleb

19 күн бұрын

We should go back to those days imo

I can literally smell which party the majority of the "US is not a democracy, it is a republic" guys vote.

@flyy1006

Күн бұрын

I can smell which party incredibly dysgenic and degenerate people vote for

Do naysayers actually think that our Founders. after fighting a bloody and costly war against one of the most powerful nations in the western world, that we would turn around and create anything less than a democracy? Nice job - well spoken Feli!

A sad commentary on our times that this has to be explained to adults.

James Madison made a rhetorical distinction between a democracy and a republic in The Federalist Papers. What he was opposing was something like the current British system, where the legislature has no constraints on what laws they can pass as ordinary legislation, which he called a “democracy”. Actually, the terms are near synonyms, but few countries have enforceable Constitutions limiting the current government, which is what Madison meant by a republic.

@user-gk9lg5sp4y

19 күн бұрын

We still elect our government democratically and no amount of obfuscation change that fact

@FelifromGermany

19 күн бұрын

What do you mean, FEW countries have constitutions? The vast majority of democratic countries do. Or did you mean at the time of James Madison there were only a few that did?

@ICottonEyeJoe

19 күн бұрын

@@user-gk9lg5sp4y so if the president gets the popular/majority of votes and still loses, how is that democratic?

@heiner71

19 күн бұрын

@@ICottonEyeJoe , Ask Gerry Mender.

@user-gk9lg5sp4y

19 күн бұрын

@ICottonEyeJoe So name another elected office in the US that is affected by the Electoral College. And also understand that 15 states put restrictions on faithless electors. I wish they all did, but whatever.

I understand the confusion and appreciate the way you addressed the issue. Yes, the US system is "democratic", but there are significant differences. Because the Constitution limits the power of the Federal, and to an extent the State governments, democracy is also limited. While representatives in the state and federal government are elected by simple majorities (including state Governors), the President of the US is not. So that a minority of heavily populated states don't hold all the power in electing the President and smaller states retain some power, we have the Electoral College. That is why a Presidential candidate can get a majority of the popular vote, but lose the electoral college vote and thereby not become President. Because the Constitution is the central document, while it can be amended, a simple majority is not enough. It requires a super-majority. A simple majority of voters, or of their representatives can't vote for a law that is not Constitutional, or change the Constitution. For that reason, the difference between the US as a Constitutional Republic versus a Democracy is real and it is important. And as you pointed out, it is something that isn't well taught in schools.

@davesaunders7080

19 күн бұрын

But at least there is an amendment process in place which in the past has been used 27 times.

@FelifromGermany

19 күн бұрын

Everything you're describing is part of how most representative democracies work, including Germany. Checks and balances a.k.a. the government's power being limited by the constitution, laws, other branches (executive, judicial, legislative), and the divide of power between federal government and state governments are all features of a representative democracy. Those things don't make it different from a democracy, those things make it a democracy.

@DarklordZagarna

19 күн бұрын

Germany is, itself, also a federal system (as are many other democratic countries, such as Switzerland, Canada, Australia, etc.). Put another way, by this definition, there simply aren't any "Democracies" at all, only "Constitutional Republics," making the entire alleged contrast a pointless one.

@FmFpF1992

19 күн бұрын

The confusion is because people tend to think "democracy" as "majority rule", as the greek philosophers perpetuated back in their day when it was created. Like the OP said, the distinction is important because a constinutional republic, which is a form of democracy, better limits mob rule and better protects the individual citizens from tyranny, ideally. We are not denying that most democracies today are representive in nature, but the ideology of a democracy used to mainly mean majority rule, until the early european philospohers started putting nuiance into the idea of better forms of democracy.

@xxpvpmasterskillerproskyen514

19 күн бұрын

Every state has different characteristics regarding its democratic processes. But that doesn't make the USA any less of a democracy. There is no one true form of democracy. And that's coming from a European who is critical of the USA (at least culturally).

Sad indeed that this clarification is even necessary, but here we are. Thanks, Feli, for your straight-forward message The people who most need to hear it will, sadly, call it "Fake news from a foreigner!" 🙄 The fact is that in the U.S., the two major political parties being named directly after the words" democracy" and,"republic" has led to a cynical and politically driven attempt to tarnish the name of one's opposing party by claiming what they are named for is not "true" America. The tactic is pathetic and intentionally sews confusion. Frankly, it is being deployed to confuse a group of voters who are not well educated on civics. Now who was it who (in)famously said that he loves the poorly educated? Of course, it was Donald Trump, the man who praises dictators and acts oddly ingratiatingly toward Vladimir Putin.

Dear Feli, I can hardly expect to sift through the 2,229 preceding comments. However, I did search for a word that, to my surprise, did not show up. Franklin. Since others have commented on the Federalist Papers--one of the most important involvements in the battle for the Constitution, though little read today--I'll just mention what has become, again, a famous anecdote. On leaving the Constitutional Convention, a certain Mrs. Powell put to Franklin (variously quoted), "Dr. Franklin, what have we got?" (I.e., what kind of government.) Franklin replied, "A republic, Madam, if you can keep it." The history goes back to ancient Greece, as A. Hamilton and others were acutely aware in their deliberations to establish a republic on an enduring foundation. Today, once again, we are at risk of losing it, due largely to the cultural degeneration of the past six or so decades. Fortunately, an awakening is in process which, if sufficiently catalyzed in both speed and uplifted quality, has the potential to bring us to reason.