Do they teach that line at schools in the US? I’ve seen Americans on the internet mention it very regularly, but it just seems so odd. Some (liberal) democracies are monarchies and some are republics. Why do Americans all seem to think those things are mutually exclusive？
Not explicitly. However, many textbooks (thanks Texas) provide ample room for a teacher to veer into “representative republic” discourse.
To answer the second part, our history education is very focused on an a “progression of the west” ice of history. They first teach us about the revolution, then the continental strains of thought that led to it, Ancient Greece into to the Rome, so on and so forth in that it presents a deeply Eurocentric perspective from an american propaganda perspective.
The hinge point is that part of Americas internal propaganda is that direct democracy is dangerous. They point to oligarchy of Athens (I. Different terms) as good. They point to the monarchy fascist whatever you call Sparta and say “had some good ideas but took it too far”.
The Rome education is very Optimates biased, after all, “if bread and circus buys them they are proof that society needs stewards”. It’s just elitist bullshit. America always was, by, and for those who abused their power to lark as the romans.
Point is, direct democracy is portrayed as antithetical to the “holy will” of the founding fathers (praise be upon them) and their sacred writ if the constitution.
It’s amusing when Americans stumble across international politics and get upset when people use words like “democrat,” “republican,” “liberal” in ways almost entirely different from the American concepts
They can’t wrap their head around the fact that Bolsonaro and Shinzo Abe are liberals lol
Even funnier was the guy who got upset that Shinzo Abe was referred to as a conservative, when he in fact had been the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party or whatever it’s called. The guy just could not understand that a part can be called liberal and still be conservative.
We’re a democratic republic, like you said they arent mutually exclusive but even the chuds figured out just yelling “fuck democracy” isn’t a good look.
It’d be like if you said you can’t get mad that your car cant drive because it’s not a car it’s a Toyota.
It’s a conservative thing, they love to pull out the “we’re a constitutional republic, democracy is MOB RULE!!” line to own the libs when they complain about the electoral college
Realistically “republic” just means “non-monarchy,” i.e. a system of representatives (democratically elected or not) instead of a monarch. 90% of the world from North Korea to Yemen are constitutional republics.
Do they teach that line at schools in the US? I’ve seen Americans on the internet mention it very regularly, but it just seems so odd. Some (liberal) democracies are monarchies and some are republics. Why do Americans all seem to think those things are mutually exclusive？
Not explicitly. However, many textbooks (thanks Texas) provide ample room for a teacher to veer into “representative republic” discourse.
To answer the second part, our history education is very focused on an a “progression of the west” ice of history. They first teach us about the revolution, then the continental strains of thought that led to it, Ancient Greece into to the Rome, so on and so forth in that it presents a deeply Eurocentric perspective from an american propaganda perspective.
The hinge point is that part of Americas internal propaganda is that direct democracy is dangerous. They point to oligarchy of Athens (I. Different terms) as good. They point to the monarchy fascist whatever you call Sparta and say “had some good ideas but took it too far”.
The Rome education is very Optimates biased, after all, “if bread and circus buys them they are proof that society needs stewards”. It’s just elitist bullshit. America always was, by, and for those who abused their power to lark as the romans.
Point is, direct democracy is portrayed as antithetical to the “holy will” of the founding fathers (praise be upon them) and their sacred writ if the constitution.
Because
Republic = Republican
Democracy = Democrat
It’s the dumbest possible partisan culture war debate lmao
It’s amusing when Americans stumble across international politics and get upset when people use words like “democrat,” “republican,” “liberal” in ways almost entirely different from the American concepts
They can’t wrap their head around the fact that Bolsonaro and Shinzo Abe are liberals lol
Even funnier was the guy who got upset that Shinzo Abe was referred to as a conservative, when he in fact had been the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party or whatever it’s called. The guy just could not understand that a part can be called liberal and still be conservative.
deleted by creator
Because they’re dumber than dogshit.
We’re a democratic republic, like you said they arent mutually exclusive but even the chuds figured out just yelling “fuck democracy” isn’t a good look.
It’d be like if you said you can’t get mad that your car cant drive because it’s not a car it’s a Toyota.
Fair should have said we label ourselves a democratic republic
Schrodinger’s America: it’s a democracy when you bloviate about China bad, but a repuuuuuublic when your glass house comes back to bite you
Two sides existing in mutual opposition while a third more accurate analysis gets rejected. Perfect for our stupid two party system that mirrors it.
It’s a conservative thing, they love to pull out the “we’re a constitutional republic, democracy is MOB RULE!!” line to own the libs when they complain about the electoral college
Realistically “republic” just means “non-monarchy,” i.e. a system of representatives (democratically elected or not) instead of a monarch. 90% of the world from North Korea to Yemen are constitutional republics.
Sometimes. Most people hear it when they express disappointment with the dogshit it churns out and get it gets used as a way of scolding them.