Republic Does Not Mean Democracy

The Republicans seem to be emphasizing American governments as republican, not democratic, governments.

Indiana's Republicans have made the distinction definite: Republic vs. Democracy.

Observers took pause when the political insiders called to strip the word democracy from the party’s platform and replace the term with republic, with some wondering if the choice had broader implications.

Kyle Hupfer, the chair of the Indiana Republican Party, dismissed any concerns about whether the change indicated a rightward shift in the party.

“My recollection of the conversation was that the (resolution) committee said it’s technically accurate. We are a republic; that is what we were founded as,” Hupfer said. “It’s not an opinion statement… I don’t think it reflected anything politically one way or another or made anything less democratic.”

 Decades ago, I ran across an Indiana Supreme Court that made the same point of Indiana's form of government is Republican. However, I would point out how much of our government is elected and has term limits. That the government of Indiana is founded on the principles of equality and revolution for a non-compliant government:

Section 1. WE DECLARE, That all people are created equal; that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that all power is inherent in the people; and that all free governments are, and of right ought to be, founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and well-being. For the advancement of these ends, the people have, at all times, an indefeasible right to alter and reform their

government.

(History: As Amended November 6, 1984).

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was republican without being a free government.  From the article cited above, a worrisome thought:

Emphasizing republic, rather than democracy, could signal a desire to put stability over public will, even to the extent of protecting a minority’s power – such as white Christians – over the general public, Bennion said. 

Free and equal governments do not restrict voting rights. Then why does the Republican Party want to restrict voting rights? Next up: voting rights, as US supreme court set to tear up more protections:

 The court also intervened to rule against Black voters in Alabama and Louisiana, allowing congressional maps lower courts found to be discriminatory to go into effect for the 2022 elections. In another voting case, the court departed from usual procedure and went out of its way to hand Wisconsin Republicans a victory in a dispute over legislative maps.

And the future approaches with

 One of those is Moore v Harper, a case from North Carolina that seeks to block state courts from being able to weigh in on disputes over rules for federal elections. The case asks the justices to approve the so-called independent state legislature Theory (ISL) – an idea that argues the US constitution gives state legislatures a power to set voting rules for federal office that cannot be checked by state courts.

We have been a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. What happens when we remove any clause from Mr. Lincoln's formulation? 

sch 7/6/22