[GJones2]

We're not a direct democracy (meaning direct rule by the demos -- Greek for the people) because on the large scale of a nation it would be impossible for the people to vote on every government action (and practically impossible even on much smaller scales). We're a representative democracy, though, with the people indirectly ruling by voting for candidates who make some government decisions and appoint others to make -- or hire others to make -- the ordinary decisions needed for the government to function. The people are ruling, but sometimes removed at a distance of several levels from the actual decision making.

Our founding documents don't mention "democracy", but obviously they attach great importance to the role of the people (again that's what demos means). The Constitution starts with the words "We the People..." "People" could hardly be more prominent that. And, much later, in America's most famous speech Lincoln spoke (with some exaggeration) of "government of the people, by the people, for the people", saying "people" three times.

It's true, though, that the Founders didn't want a tyranny of the majority, which is possible with a democracy. So what kind of government did they found? I think the key can be seen in this line from the Declaration of Independence -- "That to secure these rights (the natural born rights of human beings), Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." Both individual rights and the consent of the people (the majority) matter. What was established was a representative democracy in the form of a constitutional federal republic. The people do rule but with restrictions on majority power to protect individual and regional rights (large state powers in the Union had to be limited somewhat, so that the small states would agree to join).

It's not an either/or situation. We're both a democracy and a republic. We're one particular kind of the many varieties of democracies and republics (most of them tyrannies) -- one that rules with the consent of the people but with protections for individual and regional rights.

[equaviator]

"It's not an either/or situation. We're both a democracy and a republic."

Democracy seems to be more of a key characteristic of our form of government but not necessarily the ultimately definitive characteristic.

[PeterPrinciple]

It’s not an either/or situation. We’re both a democracy and a republic. We’re one particular kind of the many varieties of democracies and republics (most of them tyrannies) — one that rules with the consent of the people but with protections for individual and regional rights.

---

Well said,

Repeat LOUD and OFTEN............................

[GJones2]

>> “People” could hardly be more prominent that. [GJones2] <<

I meant

“People” could hardly be more prominent than that.

I feel compelled to write fast because I realize that while I’m writing a long response, most of the readers are moving on to another thread. :-)