This phrase seems to be popular in recent years and its' use is almost exclusively by Democrat politicians and mainstream media (which has effectively become their propaganda machine.)
Rarely is the word democracy meant in its' pure definition form of 'mob rule', at least among the average person in normal conversation. The common use of the word tends to refer to the very broad, general idea of a government elected by, and representing, the people, and operating in their best interests. All well and good, right? So in America, the average person might figure that "our democracy" refers to the rather unique Constitutional Democratic Republic laid out by its' founding documents.
However, that doesn't seem to be what is really meant by those that frequently repeat this phrase "our democracy". I have yet to see any definition provided for this term. There is a similar type of communication often encountered with Cluster B's [which I believe, with some statistical support, applies to many of the "our democracy" parrots - for more see:
Twitter-Mastodon liberals, political theories, and Cluster B pandemic ].
They will say something but what they really mean is completely different from the words they use. It may be a oft used phrase that you don't immediately recognize as such. Or a more obvious example in conversation; You take their words at face value not realizing it's a disingenuous statement and reply based on those words. All of a sudden the conversation is not just in left field it's in a completely different ballpark. If you repeat the words back to them verbatim, they'll adamantly reply with "that's not what I said". And good luck trying to determine what it is they really meant to begin with. Rarely there may be some other psychological reason for the disconnect between words and meaning, but usually it's just a manipulation tactic. Word salad is also somewhat common, though I think there is a distinction between it and the deliberate word games.
And speaking of word salad, there's the fact that nobody voted for Harris in the Democrat primaries. Hmm... so "our democracy" does
not mean the people have a choice of who their Presidential candidate should be. Or it doesn't matter if you voted for the incumbent President to be up for re-election in the general election, "our democracy" means 'The Party' will choose someone else for you.
There's also the matter of sending billions upon billions of tax dollars to support the dictatorship in the Ukraine proxy war / laundromat.
What You Should Really Know About Ukraine highlights a few things the MSM doesn't really cover. I find it slightly odd seeing as how fair.org is a "progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation". So they have a particular brand of bias that still overlaps the MSM to some degree. Of course it is a war, so propaganda on both sides is to be expected and finding honest reports that haven't gone through the Ministry of Truth is difficult.
Something else my visit to fair.org revealed brings me back to "Our Democracy" - this video:
The article on fair.org that highlights this video calls it "right-wing spin" and links to another which cites the script transcribed as saying “dangerous to a democracy.” All the news parrots rather clearly use the "Our Democracy" phrase in their script. It's correctly transcribed at other sources and several use "Orwellian" to desribe it. I consider any MSM news to be part of the Ministry of Truth and overall it sounds like pure projection to me. Of course, I don't have access to a Newspeak dictionary and it's various revisions. ;)
Apparently this script was from Sinclair Broadcast Group, criticized as being 'Pro-Trump' and having certain conservative partisan biases. So the story goes; that the "fake news" they are speaking of is the other MSM outlets. Ehh, maybe... Or maybe Sinclair is just controlled opposition. They refer to "social media" and "some of these outlets" which would seem to be pointed at more independent news sources like Real America's Voice, NewsMax, RSBN, OAN, X, Truth Social, etc. than at the other establishment sources (same MSM networks) that just aren't local stations owned by Sinclair. And quite unlikely to be targeting the even lesser known progressive or other liberal minority groups that don't completely tow 'The Party' line. Though some of the news sources I listed didn't exist back in 2018 when that broadcast occurred. In any case, the same scripted news is not exclusive to Sinclair and the particular use of the "our democracy" phrase raises suspicion about it being a right-wing or conservative message. Everyone knows that those MAGA-Republicans are such a threat to our democracy that they refuse to call it a democracy, they call America a republic,
c'mon man!In trying to determine what they mean when they say "our democracy", something telling is what they call "a threat to our democracy". That list is pretty long but here's just a few; Trump and well over half the citizens of the country of course, "income inequality", the Electoral college, secure elections / election integrity, the Supreme Court, the Constitution itself...
Democracy is the road to socialism.
Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.
Democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice it is a fallacy.
Real liberty is neither found in despotism or the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments.
Pure democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
- James Madison, Federalist 10, 1787
Since a pure democracy means the voting majority can overrule/oppress the minority (which could also technically be a majority of citizens in cases where they don't/can't all vote, etc.), the distinction was an important one.
Arguably, the Founding Fathers created one of the most successful forms of government for a free society. Though they would hardly recognize today's America as being what they started. It has devolved quite far from the principles which made it the greatest nation on Earth, once upon a time.
One major concept which has been all but completely reversed is the power/control dynamic. The basic idea is that the individual citizens are sovereign with all government essentially being the subject(s) of the citizens; with certain exceptions for the necessary evil of some minimal government powers required for orderly civil society.
There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States .... In this country sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise no power which they have not, by their Constitution, entrusted to it: All else is withheld.
- Julliard v. Greenman (1884)
Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law...While sovereign powers are delegated to ... the government, sovereignty itself remains with the people.
The federal government is at the bottom of the pyramid and has the least power/control/authority concerning particular citizens - ideally none at all as it's job is supposed to be ensuring the good of the citizens overall as a nation with no direct power over any individual, generally speaking.
The Government of the Union then (whatever may be the influence of this fact on the case) is, emphatically and truly, a Government of the people. In form and in substance, it emanates from them. Its powers are granted by them, and are to be exercised directly on them, and for their benefit.
- McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
It will be admitted on all hands, that with the exception of the powers surrendered by the Constitution of the United States, the people of the several States are absolutely and unconditionally sovereign within their respective territories.
The whole basis of the Constitution was a restriction of power, and the whole basis of the federalist system was that there was not one sovereign centralized power from which all authority flows.
The sovereignty of the United States resides in the people, and Congress cannot invoke the sovereignty of the people to override their will as declared in the Constitution.
- Perry vs. United States (1935)
[A]t the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects... and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty.
- Chisholm vs. Georgia (1793)
Now back to the point, lest I start down the rabbit hole of the 11th Amendment, sovereign immunity, and .gov corruption and abuses of such.
Most Americans today have this notion that the President is at the top of the pyramid, like they are the king and have all power over every citizen. From this belief it follows that the Federal Government has ultimate power to rule over the lives of individuals. This is evidenced quite well in the recent Roe v Wade overturn.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
For some reason, a whole bunch of people apparently are totally for the federal government controlling individuals' lives - power it has not been granted. Yet that seems to be what is meant when they say "our democracy" - an authoritarian federal goverment ruled by a wealthy elite oligarchy class dictating and enforcing policies directly affecting individual citizens' lives. So in other words some form of socialism/communism which democracy is the path to, per Marx.
So "our democracy" doesn't mean our democracy at all, or does it? Or maybe they really mean dumb-ocracy.
