What is the American form of government?

The most common–and grossly incorrect–answer to this question is that we are a democracy. The right–albeit simplistic–answer is that we are a republic. A more sophisticated answer is that we are a constitutional republic.

The most thorough answer came from James Madison, who said that our form of government is an “Extended Limited Commercial Federal Democratic Republic.”

By “extended” he was referring to geography–never before in history has there been a republic that covered so much territory.

“Limited” refers to the fact that the Constitution expressly defines what the government can and cannot do.

“Commercial” refers to our national character.

The Founders said that there were three main national characters–martial, religious, and commercial. Rome had a martial character, as does China. Ancient Israel had a religious character.

Since religious and martial-character nations tend toward tyranny, the Founders chose commercial.

By “federal,” Madison meant as much power as possible was preserved with the People, and that the federal government only existed for specific and limited purposes.

The idea of federalism is that the closer one gets to the People the more power there is, while the closer one gets to the federal government, the less power one finds.

“Democratic” refers to the idea that we are a social democracy, although not a governmental democracy.

Social democracy is the concept that intrinsic in our culture is the understanding that all men and women are created equal, that no individual is better than another, and that everyone has equal opportunity to succeed.

(As an interesting side note, Oliver DeMille gives an updated version of Madison’s lengthy label. He says that we are now an “Internationalist, Sometimes Constitutional (Except Where Prohibited By Law), Extended (Globally), Increasingly Commercial, National, Representative/Virtual/Popular Democracy, With a Technocratic Supremacist Court.” But that’s a conversation for another day…)

Why It Matters

As James Madison wrote in Federalist Paper #10:

“…democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.

“Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.”

In a pure democracy, all it takes to pass a policy is simple majority vote. But what happens if the policy encroaches upon unalienable rights? If 51% vote in favor of it, the 49% who voted against it will be tyrannized.

Furthermore, what always happens in a democracy is that very few people are even actively involved–which means that it always degenerates into some type of aristocracy or oligarchy, or rule by few.

To quote James Madison again:

“A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.

“The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.

“The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations.

“Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose.”

In other words, a republic has a much greater chance of protecting and preserving unalienable rights than does a democracy.

Democracies in history have always degenerated into “mobocracies” that tyrannize minorities, and they have always failed.

Beware of those who say we are a democracy — they are those who will encroach upon your unalienable rights in the name of equality.

*****************************

Stephen Palmer is a book writer for mission-driven leaders, a small business lead generation website design architect and persuasive website copywriter, a co-founder of The Center for Social Leadership, and the author of Uncommon Sense: A Common Citizen’s Guide to Rebuilding America.

He co-authored the New York Times bestseller Killing Sacred Cows: Overcoming the Financial Myths that are Destroying Your Prosperity, as well as Hub Mentality: Shifting from Business Transactions to Community Interaction.

He is a liberal-arts graduate of George Wythe University and a graduate and faculty member of the “non-traditional business school” Wizard Academy.

Stephen resides in Round Rock, Texas with his gorgeous wife Karina, awesome son Alex, and princess daughters Libby, Avery, and Laela.

Subscribe to Stephen’s blog and contact him at stephen [at] leadershipwriter [dot] com.