A Democratic Republic

Although the two words are used interchangeably by many people, they mean two different things. A democracy is rule by the majority, and a republic is the rule of law. I have heard arguments about what form of government the Founding Fathers envisioned for this country, and I think they're both right. I don't think that the word "democracy" appears anywhere in the U.S. Constitution, and the word "republic" appears only once or twice. Nevertheless, it seems clear to me that we are supposed to have a democratic republic. A good part of the constitution talks about elections, that's the democratic part. The republic part consists of all the limitations that the constitution puts on the powers of government and the people who run it. Of course, any of it can be changed, but it's not easy to do. The legislative process and, to an even greater degree, the constitutional amendment process, was deliberately designed to be slow and difficult to insure that, before a change is made, people have time to think about it and decide if they really want to do it.

The courts are supposed to be fair and unbiased but, being run by human beings, they don't always live up to that standard. I suppose they do change with the times, although they tend to be a little behind the curve. Federal judges don't have to run for election, but they are appointed by people that do. Once they are appointed, they tend to stay there for awhile, so there's some lag time between the courts and the politicians. Maybe that's a good thing, part of the old concept of "checks and balances".

When I was a kid, lots of people told me that I would make a good lawyer or politician someday. I suppose they said this because I was good with words, but I think it takes more than that to be a lawyer or a politician: the patience to sit through all those boring meetings, and the ability to compromise. We have talked before about compromise, and found that we had two different ideas about what that means, or is supposed to mean. I thought that it should mean the two parties meet in the middle, each getting an equal part of what they wanted, while you thought it should mean one party takes advantage of the other so as to get more than he gives up. Maybe you should have become a politician when you grew up. I have been known to successfully negotiate compromises between two other people but, when I am one of the litigants, my efforts to strike a compromise are rarely successful. I usually find it easier to just take my marbles and go home.

Maybe that's what they should do in the Middle East, everybody just take their marbles and go home.