41 Replies to “A Republic, Ma’am – If You Can Keep It”

  2. And what do they call Canada’s form of Government?? A Constitutional Monarchy or a Kindergarten Class.

  3. Nice as a starting point for discussion, or for highchoolers, but oversimplified.
    I thought the distinction between a republic and a democracy was oversimplified.
    It implies that in a democracy every decision is made on the spot by vote, hence its failures. But democracies have laws like republics do, and those laws are not necessarily made on the basis of immediate benefit to the majority.
    And who makes the laws in a republic? A select few who are wise enough ideally. Does that make it an oligarchy effectively? And if not… then is it a democratic process to make the laws?
    The notion that Rome failed when it went through a democratic phase seems silly too. Rome never had real democracy except maybe in its earliest stages when it was building its power and decisions were made by its warrior farmers. Rome’s decline came long after the Emperors took power.
    One thing the video does, though, is it reminds one how brilliant the American founding fathers were when they created the US. Will a confluence of such men ever be seen again?

  4. Rick. Call it the Family Compact ( I encourage you to look it up). Where French & English noble families run the Country. We have no property rights nor the rule of EQUAL law anymore. The only reason where not a total autocratic government is our close presence to a Country south of us, that despises this with its vast influence on us by population. Its why we have a 40 % Canadian content rule. Can’t let the little people know how truly screwed up the Deranged Dominion is. We threw out the idea of equal law, property rights & free speech, for PC multicultural relativism. Its why the West has wanted an elected Senate as well as PM for a long time now. Look what socialism married to Democracy by identity politics got us. Immigration invasion by maniacs bent on world domination ,for a perverted Religion. With our so called leaders in craven subbmission or fear of this cult.
    Great vid. Thanks for posting this Kate. Every Canadian , American & European or Australian should view it. A real gem.
    JMO

  5. been preaching something similar to this for years about the National Socialist Movement and the New Democrats
    but check out something like the cult of personality like Danny “Whine for Wine” Williams . I just got it the other day when he said that Obama has emulated him.
    and the Sheep shall lie down with the liars (lions)

  7. Well, it’s a nice commentary on the importance of the rule of law – with which I completely agree. Its problem is in its definitions of everything from monarchy to democracy to republic. Each of them is, well, there are problems. I’ll go so far as to say they are wrong and oversimplified.
    A nice text for this is Aristotle’s Politics. In this, he outlines FIVE types of monarchy and defines them from good to bad. The best is where the king acts as the embodiment of law. The degenerate form is a dictatorship, a tyranny, that rejects the rule of law.
    Oligarchy is indeed the rule of the few and these few are always the wealthy. BUT, there are four types of oligarchy, from the one where the offices are hereditary and uncontrolled by law, to one where the law is supreme. In non-industrial societies, this rule of the wealthy within the law, enables a stable and productive society. [This is tribalism in its genuine not degenerate mode.]
    Democracy? The video’s definition of it as ‘the WILL (not rule but WILL) of the majority is, to Aristotle, ‘the worst’. As he says, “the will of the people overrides all law”. Aristotle says that there are FOUR types of democracy while this video only provides us with on, the worst form.
    Democracy, he says, has as its first principle, liberty of the individual. The best type of democracy is one where the government is elected by and responsible to the citizens, and operates according to the rule of law. [The video defines this as a republic].
    He also says that ‘it is harder to preserve than found a democracy. To preserve it, we must prevent the poor from plundering the rich (I wonder if Obama needs to be told this). We also must not exhaust public revenues by paying for poor performance of public duties (ahh, our Unions in the Public Service Sector).
    So, this video’s juxtaposition of democracy vs republic is incorrect. A democracy is not ‘the Will of the Majority’ – that’s the degenerate form. A genuine democracy is one in which the Rule of Law is supreme, which law is generated by legislatures elected by and answerable to the people.
    The best form of government is indeed a democracy. Not the simple form of the WILL of a majority. But the complex form that inserts the Rule of Law as supreme, which law is developed by the people over time, subject to debate and revision, according to more fundamental principles of morality and justice.

  8. Great video Kate. I always favored a Democracy until I began to become educated to it’s limitations. The greatest limitation is the ignorance of the populace which is touched on in the documentary. It seems that our populace is so easily stampeded like a pack of Lemmings toward any Dingbat Idea (cliff). Examples are Global Warming, Gun Control, environment; and now it’s the Red Backed Vole.
    ***http://stopgateway.wordpress.com/2009/01/25/bc-government-destroying-habitat-of-endangered-species/***
    The Vole scare is an activist attempt to prevent a perimeter highway from being built. The highway infrastructure in B.C. is about 30 years behind Seattle: little wonder!
    For a senior who pays attention, these are scary times. You never know what the next cliff will be that the MSM are going to stampede the Dingbats over, sweeping the rest of us along with them.

  9. I found this passage especially resonant:
    “Once the Romans dropped their guard, power-seeking politicians began to exceed the powers granted them in the Roman constitution; some learned that they could elect politicians who would use government power to take property from some and give it to others. Agriculture subsidies were introduced, followed by housing and welfare programs; inevitably taxes rose and controls over the private sector were imposed. Soon, a politician named Progressivus Laytonus Liberalus IV gained purchase on the collected funds, and from this perch promised bread and circuses to the mobs who were roaming the streets. Eventually, the whole system came crashing down..”

  10. Couldn’t load the whole thing, but it sure seems interesting.
    Not sure about its credibility though – his attempt at trying to clear the confusion about the political spectrum will only cause more confusion IMHO.
    He is mixing the ‘economic’ spectrum of free market to the right, government intervention to the left, with the ‘political’ spectrum that places utopian worldviewism (Communism) at the left, and exclusive ultranationalism (the Fatherland, German style) at the right. From a political perspective, the spectrum is dictated by views towards nationalism – with the left traditionally being opponents of nationalism, and the right being proponents of it. “Citizens of the World Unite” versus “For King and Country”.
    Political spectrum is not the same as the economic spectrum, and this video just adds to the confusion by making the two seem the same.

  13. ET; What’s going to sell to the common man, the video or your sub-groups of sub-groups? Why you idiots keep making things harder than they have to be is beyond me…

  14. Evans,
    Anyone who has read Aristotle’s work, particularly Politics, will know that ET is on target.
    I may be missing the sarcasm in your voice, so excuse me, but this statement appears to be rather condescending:
    “What’s going to sell to the common man, the video or your sub-groups of sub-groups? Why you idiots keep making things harder than they have to be is beyond me…”
    If the common man believes whatever he sees in a video, then he deserves the government that he elects. Politics, and the human interaction underlying it, is incredibly complex. Simplifying it serves no purpose beyond vindicating the ‘useful idiots’ out there.

  15. yo Ty …it’s like this….
    simplified i like….
    oversimplified is even more likeable….
    ’cause i’m busy see ?….and fortunately i have the ability…an ability it took decades of application in order to confidently competently riddle the gen from the codswallop….the wheat from the chaff…the bullshit from the flies….
    so Ty, what of W S Churchill’s remark that Mein Kampf was the new Koran ?
    is THAT remark simply more ‘paranoid fantasy” ?

  16. Well, Richard Evans, a video that misinforms isn’t of any help to anyone. YOU may prefer to be misinformed and thus ignorant of the truth, but others do not want such idiocy.
    Now, I’m sure you know that a video or a diagram is far, far easier to understand than a mess of words – particularly a mess typed in a blog.
    So, if I put these different types of government up in PowerPoint diagrams, showing the basic types as a NAME, each a different colour, each with a different label, each showing whether or not they operated according to the Rule of Law or the WILL of the mass…this would be very easy to understand.
    I’d still have to be accountable for the VALIDITY of my diagram. My point is that the video, although Vivid and understandable, didn’t provide us with accurate information.
    Your mistake is to ‘go for the simple advertisement’ because, well, because it’s simple. That’s like going for the degenerate form of democracy, the Will of the Mass..because, well, it’s simple. No need to bother with the intricacies of the Law.
    So, don’t go comparing apples to trees. A wordy outline versus a neat video or powerpoint set of images are two different styles of communication.

  17. Western society would not exist except by the principles embodied within Christianity. It’s not the LAW that makes the American form of government the most stable free society on the planet. It’s the SPIRIT of the LAW that lives within the citizens that gives America it’s strength and provides room for individual freedom.
    Afghanistan cannot author a Declaration of Independence anything like America’s founding fathers. That’s simply because an Islamic society doesn’t allow individuals to pursue “happiness” on their own. Instead they live under the strict word of the law. Law in Islam demands conformance and individuality is continuously discouraged.
    Lori asks if there could ever be such a confluence of men again? In a strong Christian based society where virtue and morals are highly valued the answer is yes.
    In societies where law replaces human spirit or where lawlessness forces self preservation the answer is no.
    The former is a much rarer gem to find than the many heaps of coal of the latter. We are genuinely blessed to have such a great neighbour. God Bless America.

  18. The video correctly sets the ‘isms on one side of the scale due to a variety on the same idea, that a plebeian is not able to decide the right (as someone by the name of Scott told the plebeians).
    There is a misconception in the video in what communism is. While the anarchy, says the video, is no government at all is not clear. Communism on the other hand in its final state is a song of sirens that Obama is familiar with, from each according to their ability, to each according to his need. Sort of like Canada. Communism at the final stage has no government, it is ruled by no one, sort of like the land of lotus eaters or British Columbia.
    One commentator on Plato’s Republic (Penguin Classics) proposed that democracy is simply no more than an absence of oligarchy.

  19. “’cause i’m busy see ?….and fortunately i have the ability…an ability it took decades of application in order to confidently competently riddle the gen from the codswallop….the wheat from the chaff…the bullshit from the flies….”
    You are busy. Busy in a job. A job that keeps a roof over your head and puts food on your table. You work day in and day out. The government takes away a substantial amount of money. Politicians you elect sit in Ottawa and decide how to use your money.
    But you are busy, and you cannot give this much thought. You need it to be spelt out for you, because you are too busy trying to keep a roof over your head and food on your table.
    The guys in suits make simple promises to you and speak in simple language. It sounds great, and you don’t have to give it much thought. Then the guys in Ottawa take out a budget that is not even remotely close to what they promised. But you are too busy to notice. Because you are busy trying to pay your bills, keep a roof over your head, food on your table and so on. The guys in suits come and go. They lie and lie. And then they lie some more.
    But they lie in oversimplified understandable language that sounds great, and removes from your shoulders the onerous burden of actually giving thought to what they are saying. They are saying things you like. No need to think.
    Do they deliver? It doesn’t matter. You are too busy to notice.
    You claim that you can remove the wheat from the chaff, but is it possible to do that without actually knowing what either looks like?
    It is funny you should mention how busy you are. Aristotle felt that any citizen who participated in political discussion and decision-making ought to have a retinue of workers who would take care of those very deeds that keep you so busy. He might have had a point.

  20. Please; If you are going to bring Aristotle’s Five Monarchy’s into the discussion it is only fair, indeed necessary, to bring Plato’s “City” into view. I think one might look at this video as a succinct effort to use the awareness of Plato’s message from the “Cave” to inform an unaware populace. The average American Republican, please rise above knee jerk reactions, understands the responsibilty of a citizen, better than an American Democrat. My nearly seven decades living in Ontario and traveling extensively throughout Canada and the U.S.A. has convinced me that Central Canada continues to be a creature of a succession of Family Compacts and Chateau Privelege. The hope for the future is the shifting of financial dominence from a Toronto/Ottawa/Montreal elite to a Toronto/Calgary elite. This change, which I believe PMSH is effectively bringing into place, will move Canada towards a Federated Republic even though it is unlikely to be called this. Failure will show a move for British Columbia and Alberta to align in a configuration with Washington State and Alaska. Cheers;

  21. To the commenters further above who say, in one form or another, that the presentation is oversimplified, or that “it’s more complicated than that,” I’d just like to point out that it’s a 10 minute video. Those six-semester long videos are a bitch to load.
    I agree with the spirit of Richard Evans’ comment. If you took a large-sample poll and asked people what the differences are between a republic and a democracy, for example, I’d wager that most people wouldn’t know. And for everyone else, it’s helpful, or entertaining, to consider the potential (theoretical) downsides of pure democracy, which may include mob rule. Depending on what country we’re talking about, and what the founding religion is and so on, a majority of people may well wish for and/or demand, as their democratically-justifiable choice, things that we don’t normally associate with the fluffy-form word “democracy,” which, for some people, suggests some kind of holy goodness that isn’t necessarily inherent in the form itself.
    America’s founding fathers’ vision, that “the essence of freedom is the proper limitation of government,” is manifest in a binding constitution. It doesn’t obviate democracy, it allows democracy to flourish within a foundation that is — with any luck — immutable, in the sense that it is not subject to being rewritten by a particular majority interest at a particular point in time. I doubt that any of the commenters here would fail to see the merits of having such a strong foundation as the American founded fathers laid out or consider it undemocratic.
    It probably not possible anymore to “set up” a republic as strong and lasting as America’s has been over the years — we don’t even have property rights in our own constitution because the thought is disturbing to the prog/left — but it would sure be nice to have a constitutional foundation that limits the powers of government — in other words, it would be great to be a bit more of a republic in Canada. Canada is not very far from being socialist — a few votes here and there, a changed circumstance away — but if we had full, constitutionally-guaranteed property rights, and a constitution that limited the powers of government in a defined way, as in the USA, we’d be on safer turf.

  22. Evans,
    Anyone who has read Aristotle’s work…
    Yeah, blah, blah, blah…
    Well, Richard Evans, a video that misinforms isn’t of any help to anyone. YOU may prefer to be misinformed and thus ignorant of the truth, but others do not want such idiocy.
    Now, I’m sure you know that a video or a diagram is far, far easier to understand than a mess of words – particularly a mess typed in a blog…
    Ok, ya see, here’s the deal… You two pinheads feel that the rest of the country is like us and that they actually think rationally. Do you really think that if the newfies or the natives really thought rationally about their positions that they’d be in those positions? Do you think that if the Ontario union members thought rationally about what was being done to them by their union bosses that they’d continue to allow it? Do you think the “Simpsons” is popular because of it’s deep metaphors and subtle philosophical insights?
    Give your friggin’ heads a shake…
    Society has allowed itself to become dumbed-down and in order to bring it back up we have to start at the level it’s at and then gradually raise the bar.
    You can piss and moan about intellect all you want but you two seem to be lacking in the intellect that lets you understand your audience.

  23. Franklin’s –
    “A Republic maam, if you can keep it”
    should always be followed by –
    Jefferson’s –
    “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance”
    The reason being, limited government will always be under attack by those who would be kings or dictators.

  24. Interesting perspectives in that video. The only problem is there isn’t enough expounding on aberration of the rule of law systems, or how power can be wrested from the hands of the people to an oligarchy or cabal as was done in so many tyrannical “republics”.
    In a republic the law rules and those who can make the law own the law and thus make it exclusive to their needs and we end up with another (although sometimes benign) oligarchy ( jurocracy)
    Democracy is essentially orderly mob rule…given that a mob is always populist and never exclusivist, it is unlikely the mob will ever empower or allow minority rule (oligarchy)…or the orderly mob becomes the disorderly mob and tosses out those who attempt to rule it against its will in a period of anarchy. There is no protection for the individual in raw democracy.
    The best of both republic and democracy systems is a constitutional democracy where the law and the government exist to protect the will and rights of the individual…not the mob or the oligarchs.

  25. “You two pinheads feel that the rest of the country is like us and that they actually think rationally”
    And you seem to think you are like us, the “two pinheads”. How bizzare.
    “Society has allowed itself to become dumbed-down and in order to bring it back up we have to start at the level it’s at and then gradually raise the bar.”
    And this can only be done by making factually incorrect oversimplified videos? What do you want ET to do? Start talking in simple terms so that society can understand him?
    “You can piss and moan about intellect all you want but you two seem to be lacking in the intellect that lets you understand your audience.”
    This coming from someone who first derides “us” as pinheads, then promptly assumes his position as a fellow pinhe errr “intellect”. The difference between you and “us”, sir, is that we pinheads assume that everyone has an intellect. We believe in the individual’s ability to make a reasoned decision.
    You “seem” (as you so aptly put it) to subscribe to the American Democrat’s position – namely that “We” the “intellects” are playing to a dumbed down audience that doesn’t know what is good for it.
    We try to engage our audience. You preach condescendingly to yours. Our intellectual gibberish is accessible to anyone with an intellect. Now then, if you want to continue this conversation on the same intellectual plane as us “pinheads”, feel free to. If you do not wish to exercise your intellect and want to play name-calling games, go join the children in the school yard.

  26. “Do you really think that if the newfies or the natives really thought rationally about their positions that they’d be in those positions?”
    Posted by: Richard Evans at January 29, 2009 12:53 AM
    Reality check. You, and most everybody else in Alberta came to your positions by dumb luck. I’ve been here 30 years, and I’ve seen corporate managers that wouldn’t qualify as a janitor in a more competitive market.
    The “newfies and natives” are surviving under conditions beyond their control. I doubt that many of “us” could last very long under those conditions, but if the oilpatch doesn’t rebound soon, we might get a chance to try.

  27. And this can only be done by making factually incorrect oversimplified videos? What do you want ET to do? Start talking in simple terms so that society can understand him?
    Yes. That’s exactly what needs to be done right now…
    Reality check. You, and most everybody else in Alberta came to your positions by dumb luck.
    Actually I grew up in SK. When I was 19 I saw that there was no future beyond a union or government job so I packed up my rusted-out Corolla and my last 200 bucks and I moved to someplace where there was a future. Do the newfies and natives not have the same oportunity? Of course they do. The only thing stopping them is themselves…

  28. Revnant Dream at January 28, 2009 10:14 PM
    I’ve been ranting on about the fact that Canada still is run by a familly compact – the Liberal Desmarais clan.
    It is the overtrhow of this establishment that we Conservatives must achieve.

  29. Richard- A whole lot of newfies did exactly what you and I did. I’ve heard there are as many as 20 thousand of them in McMurray.
    I’m not a newfie, but I grew up right next door. I get a bit sensitive because of the years of hazing I got from Albertans. At least you didn’t have an accent following you around.
    As for the natives, they’re trying, but you can’t deny they still have social roadblocks.

  31. There is one glaring flaw with a republic that I can see: Under rule of law, who gets to say what’s what? The lawyers, that’s who. Given time a republic will devolve into an oligarchy made of lawyers (why do so many lawyers get into politics?). Not a pretty picture either.

  32. EBD and others. It is completely possible to use correct definitions in a ten and even five minute Powerpoint or video presentation.
    My critique of this video is only that its definitions are inaccurate. I also agree with novelty in his criticism of its blurring of economic and political definitions.
    A republic does NOT mean operating within the contraints of law while a democracy operates only by the WILL of the current majority. These are incorrect definitions of both systems.
    A Republic is a STRUCTURE of government not its operation. Democracy refers not to the structure of governance but to its OPERATION.
    There is no such thing as a society without rules of laws. An anarchy can hardly be called a society. Equally, a society that makes decisions based on only the current WILL of a majority would not last beyond the next decision. Societies require long term stablity and actions based on the currnt emotional mood don’t provide that.
    Therefore, one has to consider the ‘best’ type of law/rule system. That is one where the government operates constrained by rules established by the people. The rules/laws provide the referential stability against which Emotional WILL is measured.
    A democracy operates within the rule of law. This video’s definition of a republic is the definition of a democracy! The video’s definition of democracy as the Will of a majority is invalid; it simply doesn’t exist anywhere. A posse or gang’s decision has nothing to do with a society.
    Again- what is a republic? It’s a STRUCTURE of government not its operation. Democracy refers not to the structure of governance but to its OPERATION.
    A Republic is a structure of governance that rejects authority as vested in an elite office (monarchy, oligarchy) and instead, moves that ultimate authority to The People. The people then set up the OPERATIONS of this government. They will want to set up CONSTRAINTS on the WILL of the people so that you don’t get decisions based only on daily emotional WILL but decisions based on reference to long term guidelines. So, you set up a constitution and laws that refer to the agenda of that constitution. This is how a Democracy OPERATES.
    A constitutional monarchy, such as in Canada, has ultimate authority in two areas: the monarchy, whose power is reduced by means of a Constitution. Then, this political STRUCTURE operates within democratic rules, which means, rules developed by the people.
    So – the video’s outline of political systems, and its defining Republic and Democracy as two different political systems, is completely wrong.
    Now – a ten minute PowerPoint could show this very easily.

  36. So what does one call a 37% minority who believe the party they voted for should have absolute power?

  38. edward. was it mark twain aka samuel clements who said if there is one lawyer in a town he would make a living. if there were two they would both get rich.

  39. Great video, but very simplified and also incorrect in some points.
    There is a vast difference between the classical theories of Anarchism and what it is commonly THOUGHT to be Anarchism which is in reality Nihilism. Nihilism is where the concept of ‘chaos’ comes from, Anarchy is not chaos.
    And as I read above, Democracy IMO is not a form of government like a Republic, but a facet of many different forms of Government, and can be adapted to governments in all corners of the political spectrum. Liberal-Democracy, such as the one that we live in in the West, is very different than non-liberal-democracy, such as the former Soviet Union and many of the more palatable states in Latin America, or even the classical defintion of demokratia by the Greeks.
    You can sum it up with the phrase ‘For the People, By the People, or both?’ A Government can represent the interests and rule quite fairly, even when not elected by the people. America’s founding fathers recognized that, as did the Greeks and Romans when they advocated Caesars and Augusti and Emperors. The era of Napoleon was forged out of the French Revolution (for the People) and made France a dominating power in Europe.
    I suggest reading the CBC Massey Lectures on Democracy – it explains it more in depth than I, and probably much better too!

  41. This Video is proof that the american government is neither democratic, nor republican. It is an Oligarchy plain and simple. The Messiah and his cronies have entrapped their subjects to 3 generations of debt just to pay off 30 days worth of budgetary stupidity.
    Any American that thinks they live in a Democracy or a Republic is just fooling himself. The people have NO POWER, never did, never will. The Canadian abortion of democracy is closer to what all free people want than any other form of government. If our Senate was elected, based on 1 province 1 senator, and had REAL veto power over the commons we’d have a good first step. Uh Oh, the NDP in me is coming out: GET RID OF THE SENATE, why not have a house of commons that is 20 MP’s per province/territory. Rep by Pop is an aniquated measure of fairness. Regional disparity is and always has been a good measure of fairness.
    The Obamessiah has already shown his true face, PROTECTIONISM, a Democratic Party DNA trait. PMSH should refuse to meet with him as long as that proviso is part of the American Debt Dream. It BREACHES several international trade agreements, not to mention that the same concept was a MAJOR contributor to the meltdown prior to the DEPRESSION. Not that I condone anyone doing anything bad to anyone else, but consider; What would Tony Soprano do to cure the Pelosi problem?
    On the UPSIDE, Mr. Obama recognizes that his attentions are better focussed on Canada than Mexico, something Dubblya never seemed to grasp, EVEN AFTER 9-11.
    of course I have to add, if you don’t agree, EAT MY SHORTS!”
    LOL,LOl,Lol,lol…..
    Have a GREAT weekend folks!

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation