College of Political knowledge
Subject: Political Theory/ American History
First of all…that is republicanism (with a small “r”) not to be confused with Republicanism or in the US conservative thinking….is it truly all that? Is it the best way to govern? Is it the best for the US? Did the Founders actually give the system of governance much thought? Or was it the easiest way to preserve their landholdings and in doing so, guaranteed their personal independence and autonomy?
I have to look at the term through an American filter and in doing so may not totally agree with the observations of Kant or Rousseau…….
A generic definition is that it is ” form of government that is not a monarchy”….anything but……in the beginning republicanism was founded on the premise that political right and personal virtue flowed from the ownership of land…….that an unencumbered title was the primary basis of all social order and individual freedom, but if that title was ever lost then one’s personal identity and and political liberties would also be lost……
Although conceptually separate from democracy, republicanism included the key principles of rule by the consent of the governed and sovereignty of the people. In effect republicanism meant that the kings and aristocracies were not the real rulers, but rather the people as a whole were. Exactly how the people were to rule was an issue of democracy – republicanism itself did not specify how. In the United States, the solution was the creation of political parties that were popularly based on the votes of the people, and which controlled the government. Many exponents of republicanism, such as Ben Franklin, Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson were strong promoters of representative democracy. However, other supporters of republicanism, such as John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, were more distrustful of majority rule and sought a government with more power for elites.
No matter how one slices the history of the Revolution, it’s outcome was that the government would necessarily extend influence over the lives of the people by what we could call “the public authority”…………so from the very beginning American republicanism was that the landed gentry would control all governing machinery…….and NO matter how one tries to deny it…..The US has always been governed by the landed gentry, if you will…….NOTHING has changed in 235 years……and there seems little hope of much change in the next 235 years…….without some sort of intervention(?)…….
Yes. Good post. That pretty much sums up the situation.
In fact, it’s pretty much what I always say about these political systems. Prior to the war ove independence and the formation of your governmental system, etc., etc., Royalty and the aristocracy ruled. Since then, the landed NON-aristocracy has ruled…
Or, to put it in my more colourful terms, you’ve swapped one set of assholes for another!
Except in an anarchic system (which I do NOT promote or believe in) the result will ALWAYS be a grouo who will become the elite and who will rule and have most of the wealth, power and privilege – it always WAS so and it probably always WILL be so. Sadly, anything else would spell disaster for the whole nation since the people are NEVER likely to be able to successfully govern themselves directly (not least because the majority are FAR too self absorbed) – even if they had the opportunity.
I really don’t like humans much, do you?
Thanks for the props……no not particularly…they are self centered, lazy and totally ignorant….to answer your last question first…..
I have been doing some reading over the weekend and the more I read the more a post on human nature is forming in my head….(that could explain the headaches)…..
😆
Always with a little humor….lol