Many of you have seen the reprint of this document. If you have, it's worth reading again. If you have not, it is worth reading, studying, and reciting to your friends, family, and neighbors. It is copied from (this link) Training Manual No. 2000-25 that was published by the then War Department, Washington, D.C., November 30, 1928. --------------------------- Official Definition of DEMOCRACY NOTE Here are four (4) facsimile section reproductions taken from a 156 page book officially compiled and issued by the U.S. War Department, November 30,1928, setting forth exact and truthful definitions of a Democracy and of a Republic, explaining the difference between both. These definitions were published by the authority of the United States Government and must be accepted as authentic in any court of proper jurisdiction. These precise and scholarly definitions of a Democracy and a Republic were carefully considered as a proper guide for U.S. soldiers and U.S. citizens by the Chief of Staff of the United States Army. Such definitions take precedence over any "definition" that may be found in the present commercial dictionaries which have suffered periodical "modification" to please "the powers in office." Shortly after the "bank holiday" in the thirties, hush-hush orders from the White House suddenly demanded that all copies of this book be withdrawn from the Government Printing Office and the Army posts, to be suppressed and destroyed without explanation. This was the beginning of the complete red control of the Government from within, not from without. ------------------- Prepared under the direction of the Chief of Staff. CITIZENSHIP This manual supersedes Manual of Citizenship Training The use of the publication "The Constitution of the United States," by Harry Atwood, is by permission and courtesy of the author. CITIZENSHIP Democracy: A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic--negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demogogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy CITIZENSHIP Republic: Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress. Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world. A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of (1) an executive and (2) a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation, all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create (3) a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their government acts and to recognize (4) certain inherent individual rights. Take away any one or more of those four elements and you are drifting into autocracy. Add one or more to those four elements and you are drifting into democracy. Atwood. Superior to all others.--Autocracy declares the divine right of kings; its authority can not be questioned; its powers are arbitrarily or unjustly administered. Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success. Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They "made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy" * * * and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic." "By order of the Secretary of War: C.P. Summerall, Major General, Chief of Staff. Official: Lutz Wahl, Major General, The Adjutant General. WHY DEMOCRACIES FAIL A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship. (Written by Professor Alexander Fraser Tytler, nearly two centuries ago while our thirteen original states were still colonies of Great Britain. At the time he was writing of the decline and fall of the Athenian Republic over two thousand years before.) "Did I say "republic?" By God, yes, I said "republic!" Long live the glorious republic of the United States of America. Damn democracy. It is a fraudulent term used, often by ignorant persons but no less often by intellectual fakers, to describe an infamous mixture of socialism, miscegenation, graft, confiscation of property and denial of personal rights to individuals whose virtuous principles make them offensive." Westbrook Pegler: New York Journal American, January 25th and 26th, 1951, under the titles- Upholds Republic of U.S. Against Phony Democracy, Democracy in the U.S. Branded Meaningless Order original from: Americans For Constitutional Government [address excluded per tou] "This idea that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves." Ronald Reagan's Speech at the 1964 National Convention: A Time for Choosing The pledge of allegiance ------------------------------ "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" Some argue this pledge was removed from public schools because of "god" others claim it's reference to the republic is the reason, we have all seen the campaigns of war to spread "democracy" thru out the world This spreading of democracy includes our own homeland, the republic of the United States of America, and why we are not taught this in public schools, and why this thread seems alien to some "We have a republic, if we can keep it" - Ben Franklin SUMMARY In the Pledge of Allegiance we all pledge allegiance to our Republic, not to a democracy. "Republic" is the proper description of our government, not "democracy." I invite you to join me in raising public awareness regarding that distinction. A republic and a democracy are identical in every aspect except one. In a republic the sovereignty is in each individual person. In a democracy the sovereignty is in the group. Republic. That form of government in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. [NOTE: The word "people" may be either plural or singular. In a republic the group only has advisory powers; the sovereign individual is free to reject the majority group-think. USA/exception: if 100% of a jury convicts, then the individual loses sovereignty and is subject to group-think as in a democracy.] Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. [NOTE: In a pure democracy, 51% beats 49%. In other words, the minority has no rights. The minority only has those privileges granted by the dictatorship of the majority.]
I really hate everything about you @X_X. Half you put forth useless threads that no one could give a hoot about. The other half of the time, you and that thing of yours that you think is a brain, make some of the most headache causing arguments that one could make. Please Just Go Away
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." Thomas Jefferson, 1816. Reported for disruption off topic
Ok. Sure, you can go ahead and quote people. Your quote is from 1816. It is now 2017. If you are going to quote people to me, please, use quotes that are recent. Maybe the past 25 years? Also, i would like you to start citing those quotes. How do i know what Jefferson was talking about? How do I know if he even said that? You argue that the entire government is in on some government conspiracy. Ok, sure, you can believe that. But if it is such a big conspiracy, then why believe that Jefferson actually lived? They could be lying about that too.
Is pretty clear what he is talking about when reading the words he said, You can research Jefferson (or anyone) quotes and find all different quotes (from all kinds of people), you can even research if he even existed, you decide for yourself what you choose to believe Maybe this world was created the day you were born just so you got something to look at, but this thread isn't about the quantum physics, the field, or any kind of matrix you're thinking about That's called solopsism, very egocentric, and satanic, look into it and you'll be right at home in that belief system I don't design my threads for you directly That being said I'm not going to conform to your standards, if you want to make a thread about historical events only using quotes within a generation that's all you it would be interesting to see if that's even possible It's pretty clear those in government want more power and to get that they'll have to move away from the republic form, ignore the revolution and rewrite history You should probably check out and read the act of 1871 and see they created a municipal corporation to govern the district of Columbia, that's the historic definition of fascism from Mussolini himself, Let the facts speak for themselves, I'm not against the government, it's my opinion we have great government, it's the people who work in government who need a crash course in the constitution, since they are the ones who took the oath they should know what it says
It is rather hilarious, that you choose remain ignorant about a quote thats about ignorance. I mean..I didnt even really read the OP but...theres this thing called google.. And the internet, heck you could even research thomas jefferson at your local library. Also, history is important. Remember that when you make it to the 12th grade. You'll want to pay attention.
Yep. Been there done that. Got an A. I was simply saying that since the op is claiming the government is conspirirng, he might as well claim that the history we are taught is made up.
So..because OP said something about a conspiracy, that means everything in the entire world should be questioned? Even if those other things dont pertain to what said conspiracy has anything to do with?
The states must guarantee a republic form of government or they can't be admitted into the union DC itself is foreign to the states and was not created as a state it's a territory, so they can get away with operating as a democracy But as you can see what was said: "Westbrook Pegler: New York Journal American, January 25th and 26th, 1951, under the titles- Upholds Republic of U.S. Against Phony Democracy, Democracy in the U.S. Branded Meaningless" Democracy is a mild form of communism, it's 51 percent voting to remove the rights of 49 percent, it's your neighbors voting to make you move away In a republic it's all advisory, it don't matter if 99 percent vote to remove your rights, they can't do it until you violate someone else's rights My rights end where yours begin
But youre automatically assuming its an us vs them mentality with what you said about the 51 percent trying to "remove the rights" of the 49 percent. In what society does the minority view outweigh the majority? Society could never run like that. Also. The 51 vs 49 percent isn't stable. The 51% arent together on every law or rule oassing. Everyone in that 51% probably has something in common with the other 49%. Everyone identifies with multiple circles that orher people fit into. It could be your race, religion, what color you like. The great thing about democracy is you can always change the scales. Theirs always a mext time to vote and make that 51% turn to 49% and vice versa. I understand where you're coming from but your logic is extremely flawed
Also I'm not sure how democracy could be a mild form of communism they're pretty polar opposite. One is about voting and having your opinion heard the other one is where the state controls everything
But I digress, the different forms of government are interesting but the United States is a democratic republic which takes the best from both of them its interesting none the less
"In what society does the minority view outweigh the majority?" In a society where equality is paramount and mandatory Everyone is equal to express their views, beliefs, religions, and it doesn't matter who agrees or disagrees 80% of kaw hates my threads, I don't expect anyone to read them, they do, they comment, they express their anger with my threads, call me insulting names, a few express support Do you think because so many people disagree with what I have to say that I should NOT be able to post a thread? I'm not doing anything wrong, but people disagree If this forum was a democracy I couldn't get enough votes to save my ability to post on here, and therefore remove my right of free expression on this forum Luckily this game allows a certain freedom of expression, within reason, and I get to post my threads according to the rules I've already agreed to No one has to read my threads, it's not mandatory, they have a choice No one who reads my thread has to agree, like it or not, comment or complaint, I can't stop people from complaining about my threads, they have the same freedom as me to disagree, or agree That's why we call it "the animating contest of freedom" Is not about who has more people agreeing or disagreeing, it's about equality, we fought and died for our freedom, our right to speak, even if they're backwards, barbaric, distorted views, or completely different, even like you say "logic is extremely flawed" Everyone has an equal opportunity to be heard whether we agree or not and to suppress a view we disagree with just because we don't like it, Wouldn't we become the very oppression and tyranny we fought against in the revolution And it goes both ways, if 80% love my threads and vote on forums to make reading them mandatory, making it so everyone must post a compliment Well that wouldn't be any good either, just because you or I agree or not does not mean that an unnamed third party has to suffer not being able to post Let's say devs decide they don't like my threads, me expressing different views or opinions , they decide to take away all forums, why should the whole community suffer because of one guy, why should one guy suffer because the whole community You should understand that you are thinking my logic is flawed, full disclosure: it's not my logic, this is the war department of the army official definitions of what a republic and democracy are "officially", and these definitions take precedence over any commercial dictionaries or even what your teacher says