Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Noble713 wrote:...access to considerable greenery/parks/public spaces...

YAY! Hopefully I will be designing that park.

Silverthorne wrote:
That's too vague of a definition to be serviceable. Afterall, a military junta gets it's authority from a part of the populace, namely thugs with guns.

Its vague by intention. I have no interest in any notion of democracy which equates to "that which I like".

Silverthorne wrote:
A monarch's authority is empowered by the martial strength of his vassals, who are a part of the populace.

A part of. Not the entirety of.

Silverthorne wrote:
Any system of government dervives authority from some segment of the populace,

Segment is a nice word, no?

Silverthorne wrote:
and no government has a total franchise of all people living withing it's borders. With these two conditions in play, the definition you provide is too vague to be of any use. Of course authority is derived from the populace- otherwise there would be no authority because there would be no people to exert authority with or on.

It doesn't matter what the reality of the franchise is. We're debating political theory, which boils down to that which is claimed.

Silverthorne wrote:
A republic is a representative government were not all the leaders are chosen by popular vote.

No, a Republic is a system of government in which the head of state is not a sovereign. That is the definition of the word, whether you like it or not.

Silverthorne wrote:
In our own system, only one branch of government, the legislature, is determined by a direct popular vote. Even within the legislature, the franchise of the private citizen is not very powerful compared to the influence of organizations with a lot of money. This is especially true in light of the recent overturn of campaign finance reform in the supreme court. Since only 33% of our government is determined by popular vote, we don't meet the definition of a democracy.

Because 33% of our government is determined by popular vote, we are a democracy. Majority is irrelevant. All that matters is categorical consistency. And, again, reality is irrelevant to questions of theoretical dispute.