What form of government do we have in the United States of America?

Question

A hint:

There are numerous videos, television interviews, news reports and written materials including history books, wikipedia references, speeches and quotes incorrectly stating our government is a '_________'. What is the proper term for the form of government we have in the U.S.?

Another clue: Recite the pledge of allegiance to remind yourself of the correct term.

Once you realize the numerous deliberate attempts to thwart truth, to skew reality, and place unreal definitions in the mainstream media and history books about our true form of governance... what do you think is behind the misguided rhetoric?

"We are a country of laws, not men." This phrase shows us that 'terms' are not evolutionary, are not subject to interpretation, especially in law. The intent of the law and the definitions of words (terms), are exactly as they are printed AND those definitions are to be drawn from the period of time the law is/was written.

Fred, please provide me with the amendment or convention where congress approved/passed an 'evolution' of government to a democracy.

Answer 1

Cute. The answer you want is: a constitutional republic.

However, democracy no longer means the direct, pure rule by the people that is often taught as the "true" definition in many high schools; that definition applies only to "direct democracy". Political science, the general arbiter of these terms, categorizes a democracy by a number of traits, including free and fair elections, along with other criterion regarding human rights. How many other factors should go into deciding whether a regime is democratic or non-democratic is debated, but the broad term democracy is generally used to describe a regime whose practices are democratic.

Thus, the USA is a presidential democracy by almost any standard in the realm of political science. The states of the EU are functioning democracies, as are a number of other states around the world. Most political scientists would say, however, that Russia is not a democracy, because its elections are questionable, and its use of government power to suppress opposition forces is deeply undemocratic.

This is not misguided rhetoric, it is the considered evolution of terms, and the deeper understanding that regimes types are broadly characterized by their behaviours, not by their specific mechanism of power. The US has evolved into a democracy, just as "democracy" has evolved to mean a state that holds free and fair elections and meets other criteria of political and social freedom.

Response: There is no congressional writ that "approved/passed an 'evolution' of government to a democracy." However, the words "federal" and "bicameral" don't appear in the Constitution either, but the U.S. government is indubitably both federal in structure and bicameral in its legislature.

Your argument that "we are a country of laws, not men" means that "'terms' are not evolutionary, are not subject to interpretation, especially in law. The intent of the law and the definitions of words (terms), are exactly as they are printed AND those definitions are to be drawn from the period of time the law is/was written" is demonstrably false. If terms and rules were not subject to interpretation, there would be no need for a federal judiciary, which was established by the Founders.

Secondly, consistent legislative and executive practice, coupled with decades of Supreme Court opinion, shows that the wording of the Constitution *is* subject to interpretatioin through the lens of contemporary experience. A superb example of this is "Kyllo v. United States" (533 US 27), wherein the Supreme Court that the search and seizure protocols of the Bill of Rights apply to non-traditional searches (specifically, infra-red detectors aimed at a private residence). The entire role of federal jurispridence is to interpret whether legislation and policy conforms to the principles, as well as the literal wording, of the Constitution. This principle extends all the way back to "Marbury v. Madison", and is a founding principle of divided American government.

Third, all terms evolve in time. King Charles I of England reputedly called St. Paul's Cathedral "awful, artificial, and amusing," meaning that it was awe-inspiring, skillfully executed, and pleasing to see. This is but the most famous example.

Furthermore, please read my answer thoroughly. I do NOT suggest that our Founding Fathers called our governmental system a democracy, nor that they enshrined the term in the Constitution, which only guarantees a "Republican form of government" to the states. What I said was that the term "democracy" is, TODAY, an accurate representation of the U.S. government structure. It is not authoritarian (yet), totalitarian, sultanistic, anarchic, or any other regime type. Likewise, the U.S. government is federal, even though the Constitution does not say so, because it is neither confederal nor unitary.

I agree that there is strong evidence that the original Founders were deeply ambivalent about democracy, fearing the "mob rule" impulse of the populace. However, the Constitution's revisions have pushed the country in a more egalitarian direction (such as by providing for the direct election of senators and the expansion of the franchise), and legislation and jurisprudence have followed suit.

Yes, the United States is a republic. However, political scientists would largely agree that the USA is a democracy. Likewise, popular usage reflects this, because the word "democracy" has evolved over the course of centuries, becoming a general principle of governance, rather than the specific description of direct non-delegated rule by the masses. This is a function of language, jargon, and cultural sensibilities, just as the word "Dread Lord" has a far more ominous sense now than it did when the Pilgrims landed in 1620.

Equally, the United States has evolved into a democracy. Arguably, the US was not a well-developed democracy until at least the twentieth century (neither were most other states), because it disenfranchised such large swaths of the population (minorities and women).

The point is that. today, a broad consensus exists among scholars (who study the matter and are best suited to decide the thing) that a state which selects ruling representatives based on the will of the electorate, respects minority rights, enshrines the principle of the rule of law, and in some manner systematically protects the citizen's right to speak (and the tangential rights associated with this right) is, broadly, a democracy, with more specific gradations based on the extent of individual rights, the independence of the government from other actors (such as a guardian democracy), or the specific formulation of the government (presidential vs. parliamentary democracies, for example). A state which does not follow these practices fits into other categories, most commonly known as authoritarianism (in several versions), sultanism, or totalitarianism. What do I think is behind this trend? A need to classify similar states, an increased understanding of the basic archetypes of regime structure, and more scholarly examinations of the topic. That, and the love of jargon superimposed on convenient extant terminology. If you wish to dispute this, get a doctorate in political science and write influential papers on why the terminology of democracy and democratization is invalid. Alternatively, accept that is possible, with modern language, for the USA to be both a constitutional republic and a presidential democracy.

Answer 2

Republic Socialist Government

Answer 3

The government of the United States of America is often confused with being a Democracy, it is in fact a Representive Republic (one Republic under God) or a Democratic Republic.

A true Democracy would be a logistical nightmare since that would mean each citizen would have an equal voice in every government decision, which would me a voting process would need to be run nationally every time a decision needed to be made.

Since we utilize a system of elected Congressmen and Senators representing the common American, we're a Representive Republic.

Answer 4

The US is a republic. However, John Adams - writer of "in defence of the constitutions" used Dr Johnson's rather poor definition of a republic as 'a government of more than one person', so republics are quite hard to nail down. Most countries that are not monarchies claim to be republics unless stated otherwise (Russian Federation, State of Israel) - so such vastly differing forms of government as the US, Switzerland and Iran are all 'republics'

Answer 5

A Republic

Answer 6

America is a republic, but with the chimp being the current occupier of the WH and being as stupid as he is - he actually thinks the citizens do not care about politics and what is happening in the Middle East. It is a sad day in America when politicians constantly lie about EVERYTHING to the American people and then go on their merry way. They know nothing will ever be questioned. The next general election will tell the ending of this awful tale!

Answer 7

The US is a constitutional republic that is being slowly turned into a social democracy since FDR.

Answer 8

Perverted....thatsa what we got!

Answer 9

Your government is a "SHAMBLES"

Answer 10

..."One" Nation, under "God".... but sadly "we" don't believe it anymore.... "we've" become gods in our minds