Democracy vs. Constitutional Republic

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” —Ben Franklin

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
—Thomas Jefferson

“Democracy ... wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.”
—John Adams

“Democracy is the most vile form of government... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention... incompatible with personal security or the rights of property.”
—James Madison

“The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and ... breaks up the foundations of society.”
—Thomas Jefferson

What has history shown about democracy? What about the ill fated Weimar Republic which was a liberal democracy? How well was it guarded from the abuses of tyrannical government? What can we learn from Germany's transition from a democracy to a totalitarian dictatorship to a federal republic?

The Weimar Republic was born from the defeat of the German Empire in 1919 and that was only the beginning of Germany's political troubles. The Treaty of Versailles was signed the same year requiring reparations from Germany to the Allied Powers of World War I. This helped bankrupt Germany's economy to hyperinflation which lasted from 1919-23. Social Democrat President Fredrich Ebert complied with this infringement on Germany's sovereignty and political unrest broke out. When Ebert died in 1925, former German Empire General Paul von Hindenberg became president and while from 1924-29 Germany enjoyed a short lived golden era in the midst of Hitler's Rise to Power, the monopolization of force began with a gun control bill in 1928 which required registration of civilian firearms, which Hitler Nazi regime would use for political gain against opponents. The 1930 elections saw the Nazi Party have big gains with them being just second behind the ruling Social Democratic Party. 1932 elections made the Nazi Party the largest party in parliament. two more elections would succeed with Hitler being appointed Chancellor on january 30, 1933. The Reichteg Fire of February 27, 1933 led to the Enabling Act, giving Hitler and his Nazi Party a monopoly on power, leading to a totalitarian regime.

Question here is how could such a tyrannical politician rise to power and how could the Nazi Party have become the dominant party in parliament? How could the Enabling Act have been stopped from passing and how could the Nazi Party be removed from power and banned without armed conflict? One problem with the Weimar Republic was it tried to monopolize power when it passed gun control in 1928 and failing to have a judicial system equiped to be free of government influence. What role could the courts have in stopping such atrocities? How could judges be free of political influence and be trusted enough not to follow their own political views? The problem with government funded judiciaries is the judges nominated mostly by government have no incentive or consequence for their actions on the bench? How about public officials who knowingly break their oath of office and become tyrannical? How can they be stopped?

Non-Governmental organizations play a role in impartiality since they have no direct interest with government affiliation. for example, NGO are more trustworthy in counting votes and doing justice. This is why new checks and balances should include non-governmental law enforcement and justice systems.

What have government funded law enforcement and judges done? They've abused their power because they have no incentive to be held to account since should no branch step up and stop them, they will continue to become tyrannical. This is why there should be an easier removal of public officials by petition and merit based systems to hold judges, legislators, and executives accountable, being judged by trustworthy NGOs.

An example of judicial checks on political parties and politicians is Turkey, which became a constitutional republic in 1923. Mustafa Kemal established a Westernized Republican Turkey which has a constitution to reflect that. Turkey's constitution prohibits political activity or political parties/officials that violate the constitution. The judiciary can simply remove an official from power because they violate the Turkish Constitution. Why cant the USA have such a check? Better yet, why should we allow government attorneys to have near absolute power over legal matters?

Thomas Jefferson best said "Allow judges to be the sole arbitraitors of constitutional matters breeds tyranny and despotism". Nazi Germany had a judicial system that was funded and established by the Nazi Party. Putting your freedom in the hands of judges is like Jews putting their civil rights in the hands of Roland Freisler.

Another issue is what's our final resort? It comes down to killing government troops in the event of tyrannical government. In US vs. Miller, the US Supreme court ruled that government could not regulate military firearms. That case dealt with a sawed-off shotgun which the court ruled had no military purpose. Machine Guns, AR-15s for example do have military purpose. The final resort is violence against public officials who abuse elections to gain power.

Question here is how can broken government best be reformed. It requires violating the broken and corrupt system through armed conflict against government officials and a rejection of ignorant voters who serve to make matters worse. The Nazi Party rose to power thanks to the ignorance of voters.

The question of government funding for political parties goes unchecked. Do the funders need a terror attack perpetrated against it's facilities just to stop it's abuses? Apparently so. The IRS has become nothing more than an enabler for an out of control regime. Democracy is a cancer ready to suck out due process in politics.

Government is tyrannical because of their exploitation of elections and power with disrespect for due process. Due process is a barrier against government abuse and when inalienable rights are in danger, due process must come to save the day. Sometimes protecting due process requires use of armed force against aggressors.

What should be done about the rise of inverted totalitarian democracy? Having non-governmental checks and balances such as armed citizens and competing justice systems can help secure liberty and justice while making it easier and shorter process to hold public officials accountable. Plus, non-governmental supervision of elections and majority elections with no preferential treatment for political parties. Also allow for a Fully Informed Jury which would be protected by NGO Fully Informed Jury Association.

California can be fixed but only if it's government is brought to compliance with a Republican form of government required by the constitution so federal courts should order a constitutional convention for California as well as have NGO supervise proceedings. The Weimar Republic failed because people believed elections alone could secure freedom when in fact it turned out to do the exact opposite. We also need to secure our elections from ignorant votes and illegal immigrants.