[kergonath]

> The US is a republic, not a democracy.

This pops up every now and then and is complete bullshit. A republic is a system of government with a parliament and an elected head of state. Being a republic and being a democracy are completely unrelated. There are republics that are oligarchies, dictatorships, or democracies. Similarly, there are monarchies that are oligarchies, dictatorships, or democracies.

You can discuss about legitimacy and the fact that the US is a federation of states instead of a government of citizens, but “it’s a republic not a democracy” is stupid. Using it as a way of justifying blatant undemocratic aspects of the way the US work is doubly so.

[Ekaros]

Republic simply means there is no monarch. Dictatorships are kinda interesting, but if they are elected, it still falls on side of republic.

[kergonath]

Russia and China are examples of that (republics that are also dictatorships).

[garmaine]

China has a President-for-life. That’s not a republic by any measure.

[kergonath]

Right, China is interesting. Still, it does not have a monarch, it has a parliament that elects a president (for all intent and purposes) who is the head of state. The legitimacy of the president comes from the community, and he does not own the state or the land. Citizens are not subjects.

It’s a bit blurred because of its single-party nature, but it has all of the attributes of a republic.

[Ekaros]

In general Chinese system is quite different from Western one. First being single party and second being layered, with population only having vote on lowest layer which then subsequently votes upwards until the top.

For all intents and purposes it is republic. After all republic is quite meaningless term, specially when we consider some constitutional monarchies or dictatorial leaders that don't have hereditary power.

[kergonath]

> After all republic is quite meaningless term, specially when we consider some constitutional monarchies or dictatorial leaders that don't have hereditary power

It's a fuzzy term. As usual, not everything falls nicely in neat little boxes.

In constitutional monarchies, the monarch is still associated with "the crown" and is personally an integral part of the State, and it is almost always hereditary. Sweden and the UK are unarguably monarchies with some democratic legitimacy. I was going to write "always", but actually I'd be curious to know if there is an example of non-hereditary constitutional monarchy nowadays.

I would think that non-hereditary dictatorships tend to be republics, even if the parliament plays a purely nominal role (Azerbaijan, Russia, several African republics, etc), or just military dictatorship, doing away with any pretence and not bothering with a parliament and rigged elections (lots of them have been around; these days Myanmar is a good example). North Korea is also interesting, being a hereditary republican dictatorship.

[Ekaros]

It is not a hereditary position. One could even argue that USA isn't republic as there was two people elected from same family as head of state.