Estimated read time: 2-3 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
Is the government of the United States technically a "Democracy," or a "Republic," and what difference does it make?
Members of the Utah House of Representatives believe it's a big enough deal to pass a law to make sure school teachers inform their students that the U.S. is not governed as a pure democracy, but is rather what they call a "Constitutional Republic."
So what exactly has elevated a discussion of semantics to the point our legislature is convinced it warrants an act of law?
It has recently become a popular talking point among members of the Tea Party movement, who describe Democracy as "rule of the majority," and Republic as "rule of law."
Political scientists tend to have a more nuanced view, frequently using the term "representative democracy." As an adjective, the term "democracy" is arguably not an inaccurate description. Nor is the term "republic," when used as a noun.
Webster's describes Democracy as, in part: "A government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections."
It describes Republic, in part, as: A government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law.
But to some, there is apparently a sinister side to the use of the d-word among so-called "progressives." Any online search of the subject leads to a tutorial by Fox News commentator Glenn Beck.
In the appearance before a group of students, Beck says: "It was a progressive use and a communist use of the word ‘Democracy.' We weren't using….we never called ourselves democracy until I think around Teddy Roosevelt. And, you know, socialist progressives and all of that stuff started, that's when they started talking about democracy and they slowly but surely changed us. We're not a democracy. We are a republic. We have one man, one vote. But then it goes into a system that prevents mob rule."
On other websites, there is the implication of a formal agenda among "progressives" which would seemingly have us be lulled into thinking we live in pure democracy, eventually leading to mob rule and anarchy and the creation of an oligarchy, or even monarchy, ruled, presumably, by the surviving progressives.
So what do you think? There should be little disagreement over whether our school kids should be properly educated as to our government, and all forms of government. But is this law necessary? What are the pros and cons? Weigh in if you like, by writing a Letter to the Editor. If you would prefer your letter not be posted, please say so.
E-mail: cpsarras@ksl.com
