Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Steve_the_Stevedore t1_ir0t66l wrote

Reply to comment by Terebo04 in [OC] How democratic are F1 venues over the years? by alison359

>The line between definitions is definitely thin. but in a practical sense not every republic is a democracy.

I'm not asking you if there is a difference but what that difference is. I am sure every republic necessarily is a democracy. Res publicas: "supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives". How could you get this without a democratic process?

> they might say they "rule for the people" but de facto it ends up being a tyranny/autocracy

How could you argue that it is a republic then? If it's not the people ruling than it's not a republic. North Korea calls itself democratic, I don't suppose you would believe them, would you?

Please excuse my impatience. I feel like we are running circles. Could you describe a state that is a republic - not by claiming to be one but by fulfilling the definition that the power lies with the people and their elected officials - but not a democracy?

1

Terebo04 t1_ir0tyxd wrote

the way i see it, a republic is a country without monarch (so no hereditary power), a democracy is when a country is ruled by the people or their representatives.
So if the ruler of a country is only chosen by a handful powerful people, i wouldn't consider it a democracy but i would consider it a republic.

1

Steve_the_Stevedore t1_ir0vmec wrote

That is a good explanation! I can see how that would apply to certain states that called themselves republics (Venice, Lübeck) and it's a definition that makes sense (although I would say that the word republic would imply something else to me). Thank you!

1