I agree, except I would call our government more of an aristocracy than a plutocracy. I don't mean aristocracy in the traditional European sense. I mean an aristrocracy of lawyers who make the laws, enforce the laws and benefit from the laws.
I think there are a couple problems with decentralization approaches: 1. We'd need way more representatives. No district is actually small enough to operate on the old community level. In fact, we'd need a system that creates new districts as the population goes... and figures out ways to divide people into them. I think, quite honestly, that communities are dead as a political group. The population is too high for them to be meaningful, for one thing. 2. The fact is that people are mobile. The world is smaller. Communities require consistency. And for communities to be stable as meaningful parts of a political system, they need to be more diverse. Rich people tend to move to areas where poor people can't afford to live. Communities are basically becoming unbalanced risk pools, making them not work for politics in the big picture (people in need need higher tax rates but can't afford them, people without need move to places where higher taxes aren't needed but are affordable). The other, bigger problem with communities is that the population is mobile, diverse, and economically disparate.
I agree that a republic ultimately must do what the public wants in order to be legitimate, but the original ideas of what to do can come from anywhere and usually will not come from the general population. The reason is that it takes a great deal of expertise to do well at any job and figuring out what the government should do is no different. So what should happen most of the time is that the central government should come up with the ideas about how to deal with a particular problem and then the population agrees or disagrees with them. This works because it is much easier to be a critic than to be the one who comes up with the ideas in the first place. Consider making a movie, for instance. You probably do not know anything about how to make one, but you know when what you are seeing is a flop. That is because the purpose of the movies is for you, the viewer. Same thing, what the government does is for us, the voters, so it is easy for us to decide if what they are doing is working or not. The problem is that people make movies better listen to the viewers or they go out of business. Unfortunately, our government is made so that most of the elected officials do not have to listen to the voters to keep their jobs. And that is the situation that needs to be corrected.
I'd say something of corporatist authoritarian theocracy with little squidgy bits of socialist oligarchy thrown in for good measure. YMMV.
If they had, America as a constitutional republic wouldn't have lasted 20 years, let alone 200. Utter tripe, as a cursory glance at Article 5 and the republican government clause should make abundantly clear.
While I agree that there were people at the Constitutional Convention who were championing the will of the people (like James Madison), there were many others who feared and distrusted the general population and worked to keep them from having too much of a say in how the country was run. Article 5, on amending the constitution, seems to me to be a good example of the latter. Amendments can only be initiated by the government, and are approved by the states. Nowhere is there an actual requirement of approval by the voters themselves. So the ultimate control seems to be in the hands of those in power, not the people. Overall, I tend to agree with many of the other people posting on this thread: the people who have been trying to thwart the will of the voters have been having far too much control over the government.
Clearly you have not read the amendment with any comprehension. There are two methods of amendment, and only one of them allows the amendment process to be blocked by a federal entity, which is Congress, not the government; and of course Congress is ultimately controlled by the people. The other method allows states to pass amendments whether Congress likes it or not. On top of all that, the republican government clause effectively requires that state governments serve the will of the people of those states. So you could hardly be any more off base if you tried.
So... Where exactly do we take our idea of a republic from? Ancient Rome? The Roman civilization from the beginnings of a republic to the empire's demise was heavily aristocratic. Not very cool in my book.
Over time all types of established governments have a good chance of becoming oligarchy because people who establish themselves want whats best for their children. They hand down wealth and social connections over time leading to a society ran by noblemen. America is defined by the CIA as a Federal Republic with a strong tradition of democracy. I see a lot of the blame game between corporations and unions when the truth is management needs labor and labor needs management Unions and corporations are in essence both good as long as the proper law is in order. The key in success in anything is a balance of needed resources. Corporate lobbyism has become a problem because corporate executives in a winner take all society don't look at the long term consequences of their actions. The rich people have to much power because the poor and working class are not fighting for their rights which they are both responsible for and entitled to do. The problem with a republic in the long term is people stop believing in the laws and they eventually need to be changed to better fit society. Eventually if it just keeps adding law upon law upon loophole upon law you have a mess. That's why after a few updates computer programmers develop a new os. America actually has plenty of socialist type safety net programs and they can, when properly regulated be beneficial. The Free Market doesn't work well unregulated because super corporations have the resources to select a market and undercut the prices of certain products until they eliminate competition. Eliminating competition completely really stunts progression. So their does need to be laws regulating the free market. When you talk about different kinds of government you need to also think about different belief systems of economics, sociology and other factors in political science. A combination of these things play a part. I think we would do well in America to cut down some of our policy's like our tax code and replace them with a new simpler reformed tax code similar but not the same as the one suggested by Rick Perry. We could also start working on a newer constitution with more modern issues in mind. It is important that people understand the important niches played in our society. If laborers and management had more mutual respect for each other and their roles in society we would be able to bridge the gap between classes without people getting maced on wall street.
It's a redundant topic because already you are the Land of the Walking Dead . The matter which would upset me the most , should fate have made me American , is the concern that I lived in an Empire which crashed faster than any other in History -- 80 years at the most , and polluted the rest of the planet with its rottenness . What an Obituary . Perhaps you were unlucky because the same old factors basically led to your demise -- an amoral and immoral society led by a rich aristocracy who were greedy liars and cheats . You had no Philosopher King and in this age of speed , your subjects were able to react faster than previously But this time you did not end up being loathed by those you exploited in your own back yard . The whole planet despised you ..
America is a capitalistic culture that uses government to manage the massess. Sometime the USA uses facism in modern waring by corporate and political instigators, who profit off the wars. Hence the faschism. LOL...
The Constitution of the US is the culmination of hundreds of years of precedence. Our FF were unusually prescient, not bad for a bunch of slave holders. The issue we have now is that a significant amount of people believe we are misinterpreting it. Well, we are in some ways intentionally, why? Because our FF were not perfect and the paradigm has changed in many ways, so, just like English Common Law, Roman and Greek Law, it has evolved. Right now the Ron Paul cheerleaders in this forum are squirming as I write this. What about the "rule of law?" they ask. What about "states rights?", what about "tyranny in government?" They may not like it, but precedence is more important..wait for it...than our precious Constitution, and we are the government, we voted for it. Every POTUS and every Congress has voted itself more powers and scope and it you want to change it, vote in someone different although the only thing that will change will be what powers they expand.
The United States is a plutocracy, and everyone knows it. The mugs get to vote for the rich figureheads, that's all.
If the people are not in control (and they never have been), you have to pacify them by giving them something that makes them feel like they are a part of the process anyway.   Kinda like when a bully wants to be fair, he always gives the victim a reasonable choice. Head or gut?
I would be surprised if the people "at the top" were that clever. They are not, they are just individually greedy and talk themselves into bad policies as the money flows in. It is our job to stop this but we must stop calling each other names (communists, nazis' et al) and elect those that will do what we need. Welfare to irresponsible individuals as well as irresponsible corporations is wrong, lobbying Congress is wrong, this is agreed to on both sides. I think that business would prefer it also, it would make their life simpler and their bottom line cheaper.
A plurocracy. One powerful ruling elite and everything this elite has masterminded is deception, they caused an artificial collective mind, the masses believe what they see, what they hear. This and fear is how they get absolute control over the people one day.
The bolded part is what will get this country thru. IMO the whole Vietnam era was a big bag of BS sold to Americans. A whole generation of young men duped and drafted to fight against an imagined enemy-Communists.
New form of government from Russia, without presidents. True Democracy is here: http://www.modelgovernment.org/en/
A plurocracy. A powerful and wealthy (gathered all wealth under capitalism) ruling elite and their political shield and their election system versus the (labeled) people, programmed to move to the voting booths every four years to give away their power to this ruling elite.
The original land-stealing, slave-holding, aristocracy has been replaced by a greedy, power-hungry plutocracy, and the Average American resembles the Spartan Helots - except that they were inclined to revolt sometimes.