Today in my economics class somebody asked what is the fundamental difference between a republic and a democracy. Our professor said he knew the difference, but he couldn’t quite put it into words at the time. I thought that this was a really good and I wondered what the answer really was, so hence this post. What is the real difference if any between a republic and a democracy? Thanks.
In general, a republic has elected representatives which run the government on behalf of their constituents, as in most free countries these days, whereas a democracy is run directly by the citizens, as in the city-states of ancient Greece. The latter kind don’t work very well on a large scale, though you find some of the same ideas in places. (Small towns in New England come to mind.)
Lots of places call themselves republics when they’re clearly not. The Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea, for example.
my country india, is a democratic republic - at least that’s what is mentioned somewhere in the constitution - so are we different?
I live in The Republic of Ireland, a country in which there are democratic elections.
I always thought that a republic was a country in which the monarchy had been removed.
Republics and monarchies can both be democratic, but I don’t think a monarchy can be a republic. Can it?
The problem is that there are two definitions of “republic” in common use. By one definition, a republic is any country in which the head of state is not a hereditary monarch. By the other, a republic is a representative democracy, as opposed to a direct democracy or a dictatorship.
Some countries would be considered republics under both definitions, some under only one, and some under neither. Take your pick.
The way it was taught to me was thus. (hehe "Thus spake the Powers!)
Democracy came from the Greek demos kratos, which is along the lines of “people power”. It gave the same weight to ALL votes and therefore everything was voted on by plurality. A PoliSci prof also likened it to “mob rule”. As in whatever the current mood was, that was usually what got passed. (I could be way off, please correct the next statement if it is) I think this is where the idea of the Senate began. In an effort to take the overall feel of the states, they would vote for the overall feelings of the country. Giving a majority vote for national ideals/ideas.
As far as the US, we are a Republic, NOT a Democracy in the true definition of the word. It’s a democracy in the sense that the citizenry is allowed a vote, but they are votes to elect a representative (Rep, Govenor, Senator, etc). Therefore a republic.
As far as N Korea and China it’s little more than window dressing to appear to be a party of the people. We all know it’s bullshit, but if a regime can convince its own people that that’s the case, well that’s all they need.
I think we have a winner.
I think there are two definitions of democracy around too. For those who say, “The US is a republic, not a democracy”, I suspect that no country is a democracy.
But for me:
(1) Republic and democracy
France, Germany, India, United States.
(2) Republic, but not a democracy
China, Iraq under Saddam Hussein
(3) Democracy, but not a republic
Japan, Spain, the United Kingdom
(4) Neither a republic nor a democracy
Saudi Arabia, Vatican (Holy See)
I’ve tried to pick unexceptionable examples. For me the opposite of a republic is a monarchy, and the opposite of a democracy is an autocracy.
Just thought I’d add that I never considered my homeland of Canada to be a republic, even though it’s a representative democracy… (at least, in theory… and at least as much so as the U S of A.)
A republic is one in which the head of state is elected or otherwise selected by the people. Canada and England are democratic monarchies, in that the heads of government come from the elected parliament, but the heads of state derive from a monarchy that no longer has any real political power – either the queen, or arguably here, her governor general.
In the USA the head of state would be the president.
A republic is any state whose political philosophy puts sovereignty in the hands of the people collectively. Compare a typical British law, which begins something like,
“We, Elizabeth, by the grace of God Queen, by and with the consent of our faithful Lords and Commons, do hereby ordain…” with “We the people of the United States of America…” The old Soviet Union was very explicit in placing sovereignty in the hands of the people, though how it was exercised was virtually totally through the Communist Party; therefore it referred to itself as a union of (ethnically organized) republics. France has been a republic since about 1871.
A democracy is so called because it puts the lawmaking power in the hands of the people. A pure or direct democracy has them voting on the laws; no country actually uses this system, though there are instances where it is an important element of the political structure (see below). We (and I’ll lay odds I speak for every board member save the two or three Saudi residents) live in a representative democracy, in which people choose legislators who actually make the laws, and (either directly or indirectly) a chief executive to carry them out.
Direct democracy is not feasible in most countries owing to the complexity of issues, the amount of time required to educate oneself on them, and the sheer logistics involved. (Look at the problems we have in the U.S. with trying to have a general election once every two years.*) However, referenda are a commonplace in almost every jurisdiction, at least for bonding issues and often for amendments to the state constitution; in the West, a number of states use it for direct legislative purposes. Many New England towns retain the annual “town meeting” at which direct legislation by the assembled citizenry remains possible, though even there it is generally delegated to the selectmen, aldermen, councilmen, or whatever that are chosen at it to act the ret of the year. Several Swiss cantons preserve the same idea, for which I’ve forgotten their term. (Yoo hoo, Arnold! Fill in the gap here, and give more detail, please!) I recall that Uri and one or both halves of Appenzell are among those which do.
- Yes, I know most places have a general election for local officials in the “off” years; I’m talking the across-the-board national elections where Congressmen, Senators, the President, and other local and stafe officials are elected at one time.
Since duffer gave us the etymology of “democracy,” I’d like to fill that out by providing the etymology of “republic”: The word comes from the Latin res publica, which means “public thing” – no more, no less. In other words, the state. In a glossary note at the back of one of her Masters of Rome novels, Colleen McCullough wrote, IIRC, “Today we think of a republic as a state which acknowledges no monarch as its sovereign, but it is doubtful that the Romans thought of it in exactly that way, despite the fact that they had founded their republic as an alternative to kings.”