Posted 3 years ago on Jan. 16, 2012, 2:58 p.m. EST by shield
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
This country (America/the Republic of the States united/The United States of America) was founded as a republic (NOT a democracy, though the method of choosing the delegates was democratic) on the authority of the sovereign people who constituted it. They elected delegates from each of the 13 original colonies to form a congress. This congress, during the revolutionary war, adopted the Declaration of Independence as its official declaration of intent to break from English rule and institute a government for its own people according to the principles espoused in that document. It was able to do this because the people of this country, acting as sovereign entities with no subjects save for themselves, granted to the delegates the authority to make such a decision.
This flow of power (people with rights -> delegates -> government action) is the nature of a republic. The people, who's rights are the foundation, may (or may not) grant to a group of "representatives" (who do not represent the people, but the specific powers or privileges which they have been granted by the people who have a legitimate right to such powers) the authority to act on their behalf. The representatives elected to carry out the functions of the government, thus, may never legitimately possess privileges which the people from whom their power is derived do not possess. That is the meaning of 'government by the consent of the governed'. One cannot consent to the use or exercise of something by others that one does not own.
Why people think that democracy is the best method of preserving people's rights is beyond me. A strictly democratic society which places no bounds on the power of democratic decisions may (and will eventually) vote itself into a dictatorship. Long before it does that, however, it will necessarily violate the rights of those who are not in the majority and likely those who are as well. The acceptance of these violations as the consequences of a democracy (which, for whatever reason, is still held to be good even after these violations occur) paves the way to authoritarian government (as we are seeing today) and soon after all-out tyranny. A society which is not founded on the principle of individual rights (such as a republic) cannot stand for long before its rulers turn to despotism.
In my view, the founding fathers had the right idea in adopting the Declaration of Independence as their list of reasons for freeing their country from foreign rule and instituting a new form of government. Though the many camps and factions within the early nation crafted documents (such as the articles of confederation and the constitution) which at times contradicted the stated purpose for forming this country, their dedication to liberty and the supremacy of right was what made this nation great in its early years. The idea of the supremacy of right has all but been demolished by an obsession with democracy. This is largely the fault of the United States' agenda to brainwash the people of this country (and every other country) into accepting 'the consequences of democracy' (as espoused above) on the route to the 'New World Order'. It is also the fault of the citizens of this country and those of the countries of the rest of the world who have failed to realize what it was that America had done that was different from anything that had come before. It was this difference that made America what it was in its early days. This difference was the idea that every human being had rights and that no government action could be considered legitimate which violated these rights UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
As evidence of the effect of the attempted erasure of the unique aspect of America, I put forth the fact that most if not all of the specific complaints against the king of England enumerated in the Declaration of Independence are now being practiced by the United States. Notice that the military power has now been rendered superior to the civil power and that this is an overt step in securing dictatorial rule over a country.