Among right-wing circles in the United States, an idea often circulates that challenges the very purpose of our government — namely, that the United States is not a “democracy” that owes its citizens equality, but instead a “constitutional republic” bound by laws that are — at any rate — unquestionable. This is a false dilemma that maliciously separates constitutionalism from democracy, likely for the goal of disenfranchisement.
This position claims that neither the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution nor even the Bill of Rights guarantees democracy, fair representation and equality for all citizens. Further, this view holds that the United States is strictly a constitutional republic designed to protect its laws from the alleged mob rule of democracy. In other words, suggesting that “democracy” is a word that doesn’t symbolize the equality of citizens in a society, but rather the ability for a people to form collective tyranny through the force of a majority.
The claim that the United States is not a democracy is false for two main reasons: a misunderstanding of the meaning of the word and a misunderstanding of practical reality. “Democracy” is not merely the enabling system whereby mob rule materializes the instant power is given to the public. It is a principle that holds that the institutions and laws of a nation are decided by elected representatives who are responsible to the people who elected them.
The nuance that this argument overlooks, or perhaps maliciously ignores, is that the United States functions as a representative democracy, where such a divide between constitutionalism and democracy becomes logically false.
A constitution is the guiding, fundamental document that supports the system of representative democracy, defining the government’s powers, setting boundaries and dividing them across branches and institutions. A democracy that is guided and regulated by law to maintain order is a constitutional republic. This is the foundation of representative democracy.
Furthermore, the argument that the United States can be either a democracy or a constitutional republic is disingenuous. This position claims that U.S. laws are above the public and do not need to answer to or represent the public’s interests. In such a case, democracy is seen only as a means to infringe on the sanctity of law, while a constitutional republic is what keeps anarchy at bay. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of either term and neglects the purposes for which they are used when describing the United States.
This country is a representative democracy — a system where people have the right to elect representatives, which in turn is enabled by a constitutional republic, an array of laws and institutions that are designed to keep popular will in check by maintaining the stability of the state and upholding fairness among citizens.
Those who support this false dilemma between a democracy and a constitutional republic misunderstand the meaning of these terms. This leads to the second issue created by this argument — ignorance of the practical realities of history and the present.
It cannot be denied that the United States has treated its people unfairly in its past. Racial biases, wealth inequality and other practices of discrimination in general have created social divisions that persist to this very day. Nevertheless, the overall trajectory of this nation has been toward greater individual liberties and more grounds for equality from decade to decade. What this means is that starting from a point of social inequality and division, the purpose of the government and the popular will directing it has been to promote fairer representation and a fairer society.
To argue that the United States is not a democracy suggests that it is not in our government’s interest to pursue progress in justice and equality. This is the malevolent consequence of an inept line of logic. Separating laws from their purpose is a veiled motivation to promote the status quo, from which only those who are not facing injustices benefit.
In simple terms, arguing that democracy and a constitutional republic are mutually exclusive only benefits those who have the power to decide what the law, as pursuing the constitutional status quo contradicts the United States’ values of liberty and equality. I personally have a hard time believing that this argument is an innocent misunderstanding. Rather, it is a deliberate challenge to the fairness and equality of all citizens, camouflaged by a false concern about “mob rule.”
The simple answer to the “constitutional republic, not democracy” debate is a rhetorical question — who does the Constitution serve? Whom do the laws created by the Congress and the Constitutional Court, the politicians elected to be representatives and justices chosen to be the arbiters of our law, serve? For whom exactly does the constitutional republic work?
Any answer that is not “the people” only carries the malevolent intent to take away from the public the power to advocate for fairness and justice. The false dilemma between laws and their purpose is a cruel tactic to undermine democracy as a principle. It must be continually countered by upholding that all laws are created to represent the people first.
Deniz Gulay is a junior double-majoring in history and Russian.
Views expressed in the opinions pages represent the opinions of the columnists. The only piece that represents the view of the Pipe Dream Editorial Board is the staff editorial.