sounds good in theory but... but it's very hard to be implemented.

Some reviewers equate republicanism with the GOP, which it certainly isn't; nor does republicanism describe the intervention of representatives between the people and the government, which in fact the republicans tended to despise (e.g., Rousseau). In fact, republicanism isn't limited to a particular political arrangement at all, since many inclined to aristocracy (Jefferson) and monarchism (Montesquieu), though most often the old republicans were democrats at a time when "democracy" was still a bad word. The idea of being a "republic" was so incredibly prized during the age of the Founding Fathers that all sides laid claim to the word, often deceptively (so the Federalist lies when it says that democracies can't work over large countries, while republics can ... actually it's the exact opposite).

So what made it so prized? Republicans' view of the world boils down to the argument that the "public thing" (the literal meaning of "res publica") needs to consist of the people themselves, and when the people inevitably lose power to powerful institutions such as kingly courts and standing armies, the society will decline into tyranny. So you can see how it's a theory of history. It's also a theory of citizen behavior. Republicans understood that they needed to act as both citizens and subjects: virtuous and deferent in relation to one another, but also willing to take up arms when needed. The Bill of Rights' language about why militias are essential, for example, comes straight out of classical republicanism. It's a bit tragic that we've lost touch with this political theory, which has such a usefully deep distrust of all institutions, particularly armies and wannabe dictators, both of which we Americans have way too much of. Instead, we've given up our power to our representatives and the national military, but it's probably inevitable for us as Americans. Such an inherently unstable view of history and politics can succeed only in smaller states like Switzerland, where republicanism still seems to be practiced.

A very important ideology based on freedon and rule by the people, too bad the Republican party pervert the meaning.

At its core, there is much to admire and contemplate. . .before republicanism sold out to mysterious isolationist zealotry that wants to modify personal liberties in the name of something they call 'morality' and denegrade science, this philosophy had much to admire and emulate. . .

Everyone seems to thing Republicanism is being religious. No it's not believing in the nannystate the Democrats propose.

 Many of the con-man conservatives that post here tend to assault other people's sources based on the levels of their own ignorance, and then they'll often try to use fake liberals with false "cred" to back them up. Let's call this "the FOX News false-flag format". 

(Examples: If any liberal or progressive democrat here seriously *believes* that Mort Kondracula, that wimpy punching-bag b|tch for Sean Hannity's Pannities, Alan Coombs, Susan Estridge or Tammy Bruce are REAL LIBERALS or even REAL DEMOCRATS, than you also *believe* that the FOX News is "fair and balanced"!)

 Christo-fascists, crypto-fascists, paleocons and  neocons all use their own preferred "historians" and political gurus - like David "Lies like a Cheap, Lying Christian Whore" Barton and Rick "Poses with Fetuses" Santorum WITHOUT EVER  letting you know who they are mimmicking and DEFINITELY without ever fact-checking their assertions. That's why they tend to believe some G0ofy-a$S Sh|t, like, a disagreement between me and a believer - or a dissagreement between Bill O'Reilly & Noam Chomsky is somehow tantamount to a jump-ball toss-ups!

  Yes. I know. Anyone with even a slippery two-fingered grasp on reality knows how hilariously laughable that is, BUT  those people don't watch the FOX News Network, do they?

  That's what they're hoping to accomplish HERE - to make the internet into an ideologues shout-down screaming match, just exactly like they did TO  talk radio and WITH  the FOX Noise Network.

  They can only do that if the rational people ALLOW them to do it.

  Helpful Hint and Search Engine Tip: There are some people who post here as "liberals", "moderates" or "centerists" who are using THE EXACT SAME NICKNAMES - or DAMNED SIMILAR usernames as those that they used when they were posting as FReeperz!

   (A little bit of Google-time can be a very informative thing!)

  Personally, I won't waste my time debating with FReeper-Trash - I'll generally make a joke of their responses, be polite as possible in closing and then move-on. For those of you who know the FReeper breed and their rat-f*cker tactics (that's a Lee Atwater / Dick Cheney - phrase, not mine!) you already understand why. Those of you who DON'T know what FReeperz are, well, what can I say! You'll learn their tactics and their stench - or you'll eventually learn to enjoy your own force-fed diet of "Fair and Balanced Flatulence" - you can avoid it or enjoy it with my blessing!

='D

  Ciao' !

...by the way words "republic" and "democracy" when translated from their original languages (Latin and Greek) mean almost the same thing. It's THE DETAILS  that matter and if the Republican Party were to be given sodium pentathol without their knowledge they'd all publicly ADMIT that they want either a corporate dystopia or a theologian's kakistocracy.

..

All too often the representatives do not represent you. Instead they represent a big corporation which is funding their campaign.

I mean with the small r. Large R is turning into impeRialism.

To be very succinct, this country is a republic -not a democracy- for too many reasons that I care to presently mention.  Its Republican ideals came from the God-fearing, God-inspired forefathers who lived primarily in the 18th century of this country's history.  I, personally, can't imagine being Republican Conservative (I'm as die-hard as anyone who's ever lived), unless I had a much lower I.Q.  It's no coincidence that the most inspired people who live in this country (those that actually have God in their lives and actually still believe in the existence of God and pray to him, though the number of people that do diminishes greatly every day) and the most religious people (Bible belt, midwest and other regions) conform to Republican conservative ideals, in general, moreso than Democratic...or at least liberal ideals.  Liberalism is contrary to everything that this country once stood for and is destroying this country more and more every day.  I'm sure as hell not a bigot, in fact I'm as open-minded a person as there is.  Which means that at times I vote Democrat (more often on the county or state level than on the national level), since some Republicans are a lot more corrupt, incompetent and/or God-less than some Democrats.  But in general this is not the case and it's no coincidence.

Republicanism does not refer to the Republican party; it is a form of democracy where the people are *represented* by elected officials. While elected officials are often stupid or crooked, they are an important counter-weight to unelected power-holders and the manipulation of direct democracy by the wealthy (see: California). Republicanism has been eroded in the last 25 years, as the unelected officials of the executive branch, the federal bureaucracy, and the judiciary have expanded their power at the expense of elected officials. The trend towards media consolidation, direct referendums and polls (known as 'plebisciary democracy') also represents an erosion of Republicanism. The abuse of power by imperial presidents (Jackson, Nixon) have, in the past, strengthed the legislative branch and led to a revival of Republicanism; time will tell.

If this nation was governed by a Republican Form of government, as it is suppose to be, then We, The People, would flourish as would our nation. As it is, we have a government which is controlled by a so-called two party system which bears little resemblance to the Constitutional Republic established by our Founding Fathers. We have two political parties which have merged into a double-headed leviathan, uninterested in the future of the nation or the Liberty of the People. The two parties are nothing more than branches of a corporate fascist machine, and they serve their master well. Until We, the People begin to resist this government, refuse it's unjust and un-Constitutional laws, until we no longer consent to its rule we will continue down this road of Statist Authoritarianism.

Federalism eforced by STATE POWER.

Some of you guys are idiots. You're refering to conservatism, not republicanism. Republicanism is the system of government we really have, where politicians are allowed to decide for the people by whom they were elected. What you guys are doing would be like me bashing democracy because it sounds similar to the word democrat...

Based on ineqaulity. Its sole purpose is to take from the poor and to give to the rich!

There are plenty of good people in all parties. I just feel the whole 'moral fiber' that is associated with this party/idea is total fabrication. Mostly because the general idea is about being more self centered rather than helping others.

Listen, folks...this is a rating of republicanism as a concept of political order, not as an evaluation of the Republican party. (Notice that there is no rating for 'Democrat' on this board!) If only people on this board gave a higher rating to Government class in high school.

Not ALL republicans are great. Some are downright lousy! For example, the former governor of my homestate, Christie Whitman, was a terrible governor whose morals and convictions were a joke. She barely accomplished a thing while in office. With that said, republicanism is based on morals and beliefs that have been tried and true. And that's why I'm a proud Republican!

The United States is a republic, not a democracy. That is how it was founded and that is how it should remain. Pure democracy means mob rule and a tyranny of the majority, and is to be avoided.

Good efficient government. People should be able to choose their own destiny. The government should play second fiddle to the populace, not vice versa. However, some rupublican ideas, like the abortion policy, i don't like, There should be a government that combines the fiscal ideals of rupublicanism with the humanist beliefs of the democrats. Thet would be the perfect government.

our system of government (or lack thereof)in this country when people's rights are protected then it a good political system no more no less when you do not keep an eye of a powerful minority ( the corprate elite, ie)then it's just as bad as communism corrupt politicans who only suck off the breast of corprate dollars like bush, cheney, clinton

Republicanism would be the best system of government (e.g, United States), combing pacifism, which is morally superb, with the idea of having a military so if a Nazis-like nation invades your territory, at least you can put your foot down and fight back. It's like democracy only you do not have to represent yourselves in parliament and can just elect senators instead. Republicanism is the next best thing to democracy. It's only flaw is that the leaders may rig the voting (e.g, Zimbabwe) and elect themselves, making the whole idea a waste of time in the first place.

You people are aware the United States is a republicanism not a democracy... aren't you? But seeing as you morons put democracy above republicanism... God save us all... Too many idiots!

Some people seem to be confused about this...Republicanism is referring to the style of government, NOT the political party. This is a very good system beacuse it stops our country from being a follow the sheep type democracy. Also, it means that we don't have to hold referendums on every single decision that is made in our country. The weakness with the system is that our elected representatives are at best imperfect and at worst liars or beholden to campaign contributors.

A pure democracy just does not work for a modern nationstate with so many decisions and complex matters to be determined. A Republic allows for professional decision makers who are elected for fixed terms. Professional decision makers allow the citizens to delegate matters and power to people who can dedicate their time to understanding the issues (in theory at least) so as to make better informed decisions. A fixed term allows the elected official to make unpopular, yet correct decisions without fear of immediate political retaliation. With so much spin and incorrect information available these days, this type of political structure is crucial. The bottom line is that modern societies are simply to large, complex and heterogenous for a pure democracy to effectively function, resulting in a Republic being the one of the better alternatives.

Republicanism is the best form of government that is possible, considering the fallability of human nature. This isn't Republican as in the American political party. Rather this is a system where the people elect a group of their fellow citizens to represent their best interests in the government. This lends a great deal of stability to the political system, if the politicians are held to regular account by the voters that is. That is why civic involvement is very important. A republican government can work only if the heat is fixated on the politicians constantly. If they don't perform, the voters won't re-elect them, it's that simple. Of course, the system isn't perfect; many politicians aren't exactly pillars of competence. That's why voter turnout and political awareness needs to increase in this country. We get mediocre political leadership because Americans as whole are politically apathetic. But on the whole, the American variant of republican government has been one of the main reasons why our system is so stable. This is by far more stable than pure democracy. That system qualifies more as a mobocracy. It might sound very utopian and ideal to have a government that directly responds to the will of the people, but the likely outcome of this would be very contradictory and rash judgements. And besides the fact that a lot of citizens just don't care unfortunately. It would be a policy-making nightmare where nothing will get done. Better that we get people who have a stake in the policy making process and keep them accountable.

To quell the discossion as to what a republic is and a democracy is, America is a mix, also kknown as a representative democracy A republic gives power to local authorities as th US does, but they are not neccesarily voted for. Senaters in Rome for example, (before it was an Empire) were not voted to their places in the government, and often they would feud for power, however in a true democracy ever man represents himself. Here in America we have a beautiful mix of both. We vote (democracy) for senaters and other elected officials to represent us (republic)

I guess I don't have problems with the idea of The Republic, as delineated by Plato, but why have so many hypocritical, racist, arrogant, and intellectually-bankrupt people been associated with the Republican party? In the last fifty years, the only republican president who wasn't a demonstrated criminal and sociopath was Gerald Ford, and he was the one who pardoned Richard Nixon. Republicanism is one of the better forms of government in the world today, but not as it is practiced in the US.

It has some decent theorists of all stripes. However, it is utterly morally bankrupt in practice as least as far as concerns federal policy. A republican federal government summed up: taxes bad but taxes spent on the military for any purpose under the sun good. The cliche is true democrats are tax and spend and republican are "run up huge deficits and bankrupt the country and spend (on the military)".

What the US has been since its birth. Technically, democracy has never made its way to the US.

Definitely the best form of Government. Hands down.

".... and to the REPUBLIC, for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all". Ladies and gentlemen, the United States is a republic, and is therefore based on republicanism. We are not a Democracy- in a Democracy, every single citizen of this country would have to pack our bags for eight months and head to Washington D.C. to represent ourselves. Instead, as a republic, we typically elect officers who follow our beliefs. In a Democracy, in which the majority of its people are White, Civil Rights Legislation would not have been passed in 1964 because in a Democracy, the majority rules. Plain and simple. However in a Republic, the majority does rule, but we still protect the rights of minorities as well. I agree with the post that stated that "Democracy is just like having 4 wolfs and one sheep deciding on what to have for lunch". This Republic in which we live has surived for over 250 years, and it will continue to survive. God bless America!

Trent Lott is a great spokesperson for this party. He epitomizes all the narrowminded pinheads that try to run the world. I've said it before and I'll say it again- as long as we have jerks like this running Washington and not giving a damn about how US policies affect the rest of the world, we'll have more and more people around the world hating us, and more and more terrorist attacks.

I used to complain that the Republicans were simply the lesser of two evils, and I still think that to a degree. I used to think that I was doing the right thing by abstaining from voting in elections, because I did not fully support the positions of the Republicans (I will NEVER vote Communist... oops, I mean Democrat). Now, I see that the Republicans are the only thing keeping this country from commiting suicide. Everything the left "stands for" is completely against my principles. I very much admire Bush and the Republican leadership for standing tall against the increasingly insane anti-war ravings of the left, and more importnatly, for standing up for human values and freedom for the rest of the world. If the US is to be the world's police force, I am confident in the abilities of the current leadership to rationally achieve their goals, rationally choose enemies, and rationally promote freedom worldwide. We Americans need fear nothing while in the hands of the current leadership; they have shown courage and a commitment to responsibly rid the world of cruel and anti-human regimes.

republicans have become the party of the mainstream. we all want to keep more of what we earn. also we should get a strong defense for our tax dollars, most of all now while we are under the constant treat of attack. we can only have peace through strength. we can no longer have a weak military like in the 90's. that is why we were attacked.

Over 90% of these nations (non-monarchies) are ecconomic falures, goverment steeling from the nation and inefficient constitutions are common (Not talking about the American party). A constitutional monarch serves as a 'watch dog' over politicians (and has shown over 50% ecconomic success rate). Years ago I checked into the issue, For and Against; when I found this out my repulicanism stoped.

The USA is a representative republic, which places the rights of individuals above those of the group. The opposite of democracy, which is mob rule. It's a shame so many Americans don't understand it.

Far superior to democracy, a representative government is vastly more likely to represent the desires and needs of it's people, while protecting the minorities.

The best of the best. What Lincoln, Jefferson and Washington were...

Whereas democracy has been defined as 4 wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for lunch, republicanism is picking a wolf to decide what all the wolves and sheep should do about anything and paying it for the privilege of taking away your choices.

Ignorance, bigotry, and intolerant conservatism rule this narrow-minded party.

People getting the message that less government is better government. GWB can help get the country back on track after 8 years of madness...

Democracies can only work for relatively small populations. Even today with the amount of technological progress of society allowing exceedingly huge communication capabilities, accurate democratic rule is too cumbersome to even consider for a population in excess of 50,000. The very best form of government, allowing the greatest number of citizens the most amount of liberty is a modified democracy, in my opinion, the democratically elected republic. A democracy fails often because of voter apathy and the fickle will of the people. The Res Publicam does have its faults though. The elected representatives of a republic tend to abandon their productive roles in society to devote their lives to public service. I prefer the idea of a part time representative, one who has aspirations besides those of political office. Additionally, republics tend to be fragile structures which do not tend to last in large scale government for more than 200 years. They tend to be susceptible to the whelm of dictators and kings leading to tyranny.

Republicanism will always be better than monarchy, because it's not democratic to heritate positions & power. But not all republican systems are as good as it should be. The best example is probably the US, where the president have almost inmense power. Well, he's elected, but he's only one, & can't of that reason represent the whole people like a parliament can. I don't even think a country needs a president. An elected prime minister is more than enough, & that's what I wish Norway will get when we one day will change our constitution & become a republic. :-)

As I've said before, I'm no deep political thinker, but recently I've been reading some books that have made me think about the differences between "democracy" - where the people have direct power - and "republicanism" - where the people elect representatives who have the power. Under pure democracy, you run some serious risks, like the possibility of the majority tyrannizing the minority or the possibility that public opinion, fickle as it is, can't set and hold consistent policy. Imagine a country where everyone is hooked up to the Internet, and all major government decisions are made by a direct majority vote of the people... That society would qualify as a democracy, but it would be a nightmare. Republican governments (like the U.S.), on the other had, use elected representatives to create a much-needed buffer between the whims of the majority and the ability to create policy.

When Ben Franklin emerged from the Constitutional Convention in 1787, it is said a woman asked him "What kind of gov't have you given us?" His reply: "A republic, if you can keep it." (A brilliant statement of how the PEOPLE have to respect our legal institutions for them to work... witness the trouble many Latin American countries have had, even after largely copying our Constitution.) In any case, many can hardly remember the difference between a republic and a pure democracy (like those who thought the popular vote determined the presidency).