No it's not!
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/republic
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/republic
It's often argued by opponents of our Constitutional Republic, that this is some version of a Democracy... but that is only an opinion....
The best source for "future interpretations of the Constitution", would be the Federalist Papers. "The Federalist Papers are a series of 85 articles or essays advocating the ratification of the United States Constitution. Seventy-seven of the essays were published serially in The Independent Journal and The New York Packet between October 1787 and August 1788. A compilation of these and eight others, called The Federalist; or, The New Constitution, was published in two volumes in 1788 by J. and A. McLean. The series’ correct title is The Federalist; the title The Federalist Papers did not emerge until the twentieth century.
The Federalist remains a primary source for interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, as the essays outline a lucid and compelling version of the philosophy and motivation of the proposed system of government. The authors of The Federalist wanted both to influence the vote in favor of ratification and to shape future interpretations of the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson called the Federalist Papers the best commentary ever written about the principles of government."
https://thefederalistpapers.org/federalist-papers
Specifically, "Federalist Paper #10 - The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection (continued)"
From the beginning: Declaration of Independence
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript
The Constitution:
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
Lol that feeling when your own source refutes what you say. Read YOUR link again: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/republic#note-1
More than this, you should understand those definitions very clearly. Read them carefully. Your own source proves my case.
I don't need to read the Federalist Papers to know that the Founding Fathers were staunchly against Direct Democracy. Herp Derp, Boomer, we're aware of this. But there are more than one type of democracy, dumbass. Save your patriotic horseshit for another day. Understand this fact: a republic IS a representative democracy. You can read more about this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy
And a REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY IS DEFINED AS: "Representative democracy, also known as indirect democracy, is a type of democracy where elected persons represent a group of people, in contrast to direct democracy. Nearly all modern Western-style democracies function as some type of representative democracy: for example, the United Kingdom (a unitary parliamentary constitutional monarchy), India (a federal parliamentary republic), France (a unitary semi-presidential republic), and the United States (a federal presidential republic)."
And with that being said, you're still a fucking retard for even claiming that it's not a democracy because 'muh constitution' and 'muh federalist papers'. The whole time you were blinded by your Trump voting, Murica horseshit, bald eagle memes and your Proud to Be An American music playing in the background with your false dichotomy politics, you fucking Nascar watching trailer trash. Your entire speech is nothing short of Boomer Starter Pack propaganda. The GOP is dogshit because of people like you and I, for one, am looking forward to your quit exit.
Yeah, why read the Federalist Papers when you can go to wikipedia and read your fellow comrads nonsense that anyone can post to!
You could have saved yourself some embarrassment here by just saying your a douchbag, basement dwelling, parasite Communist,of course you'd probably prefer the term Democratic Socialist! KEK
You are as worthless as tits on a boar! GTFO Retard!
You're lazy, stupid, and ignorant. I swear to god I'm arguing with a nigger. Here you go, nigger. This will be the last time I respond to your niggerisms. There are MANY sources which support my argument. Just search the internet for "Republics and Representative Democracies". It's not that hard. https://www.britannica.com/topic/republic-government I'm sure you'll try hard to come up with another excuse. But your failure to read, understand, even re-read YOUR OWN SOURCE, isn't my fault. You're just a low IQ, tv watching cuck normie that didn't study political science, much less political philosophy. The world is full of dumb people. You're one of them. Someone should have told you already.
(post is archived)