Beg you pardon, but note page 7, question 2, and I quote:
>The United States, under its Constitution, is a federal, represent-
ative, democratic republic, an indivisible union of 50 sovereign
States. With the exception of town meetings, a form of pure democ-
racy, we have at the local, state, and national levels a government
which is: ‘‘federal’’ because power is shared among these three lev-
els; ‘‘democratic’’ because the people govern themselves and have
the means to control the government; and ‘‘republic’’ because the
people choose elected delegates by free and secret ballot.
Nowhere does it say it is a representative democracy, but it does state there is the occasional town meeting which is purely democratic in nature.
It explicitly states a republic with a democratic character, specifically in the sense whereby the democratic part refers to that character by which the people are the ultimate source of control over the government.
Props for the citations though. I had to check. Also, note that Congressional Resolutions are a glorified instance of "Hey voters, we have an opinion!" and are largely irrelevant to anyone that actually is already a citizen. Many would prefer that Congress spend more time not making resolutions, and more time solving actual problems.
Now your 0th source is interesting, and I see no indication of when that document entered circulation. However, depending on the administration in power, or who has approval authority, it's best to just kind of average things out based on what you're trying to do.
Though note, if this document is part of the process of becoming a citizen, this is taking surprising liberties with more foundational documents, and shown to the right representative in a bad enough mood, that it may ruin a civil servant's day by having to be rewritten. It's a back and forth sort of thing.
In short, try not to take it too seriously, like those of us that obsess over documents do. It just leads to migraines and frustration.
> Nowhere does it say it is a representative democracy
I quoted page 8 saying exactly that! (Question 5, "The Constitution") "The original charter, which replaced the Articles of Confederation and which became operative in 1789, established the United States as a federal union of States, a representative democracy within a republic"
It says the US Constitution established the United States as "a representative democracy within a republic". This isn't talking about direct democracy at the local level – the US Constitution has nothing to say on that topic. It is saying that the United States itself, federally, is "a representative democracy within a republic".
> In short, try not to take it too seriously, like those of us that obsess over documents do. It just leads to migraines and frustration.
You claimed I was redefining words. I provided evidence that the US Citizenship and Immigration Service and the US Congress uses definitions closer to mine than to yours. You then tell me not to "take it too seriously"? Maybe you could just have said, "No, I was mistaken to say you were redefining words, you aren't".
Definitions are based on usage after all. If the way I (a guy in Australia) use a word is (roughly) the same as the way the US Congress uses it, that is pretty strong evidence that way of using it is mainstream and legitimate
And now I have to apologise for that, because I realise you are not the person I was originally talking to, but someone else. I should have been paying more attention before I spoke so strongly
>The United States, under its Constitution, is a federal, represent- ative, democratic republic, an indivisible union of 50 sovereign States. With the exception of town meetings, a form of pure democ- racy, we have at the local, state, and national levels a government which is: ‘‘federal’’ because power is shared among these three lev- els; ‘‘democratic’’ because the people govern themselves and have the means to control the government; and ‘‘republic’’ because the people choose elected delegates by free and secret ballot.
Nowhere does it say it is a representative democracy, but it does state there is the occasional town meeting which is purely democratic in nature.
It explicitly states a republic with a democratic character, specifically in the sense whereby the democratic part refers to that character by which the people are the ultimate source of control over the government.
Props for the citations though. I had to check. Also, note that Congressional Resolutions are a glorified instance of "Hey voters, we have an opinion!" and are largely irrelevant to anyone that actually is already a citizen. Many would prefer that Congress spend more time not making resolutions, and more time solving actual problems.
Now your 0th source is interesting, and I see no indication of when that document entered circulation. However, depending on the administration in power, or who has approval authority, it's best to just kind of average things out based on what you're trying to do.
Though note, if this document is part of the process of becoming a citizen, this is taking surprising liberties with more foundational documents, and shown to the right representative in a bad enough mood, that it may ruin a civil servant's day by having to be rewritten. It's a back and forth sort of thing.
In short, try not to take it too seriously, like those of us that obsess over documents do. It just leads to migraines and frustration.