Are You a Threat to Democracy?
Democracy or Republic? Understanding the True Threat to America’s Future
In his article Are You a Danger to Democracy?, Jonathan Copeland critiques the increasing rhetoric labeling Trump supporters as a threat to democracy, arguing instead that America is not a democracy but a republic. He explores the Founding Fathers’ opposition to pure democracy, highlighting their belief that a republic offers greater stability and protection against the tyranny of majority rule. Copeland emphasizes the importance of recognizing the distinction between democracy and republic and warns against the growing push toward democratic principles that could undermine America’s constitutional framework. He urges Americans to safeguard the republic and resist progressive efforts to transform it into a pure democracy.
By Jonathan Copeland
Americans are accustomed to political opponents trading insults amongst themselves but a shift has recently occurred. In September 2016, then democratic nominee for president, Hilary Clinton, made headlines not by engaging in political debate with her opponent but by attacking those who supported him. Speaking at the LGBT for Hillary Gala in New York City, she referred to a significant portion of Trump supporters as “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic—you name it.” She also described them as “irredeemable” and belonging to what she termed “the basket of deplorables.”[1] In the days leading up to the 2024 election, the sitting president, Joe Biden, echoed that theme by referring to the “supporters” of Trump as “garbage.”[2] Such personal attacks reveal a deep dislike of those who back the America First agenda, a disdain often propagated by the mainstream media. As the predominantly red dust settles in the aftermath of the recent presidential election, the supporters of Donald Trump again face criticism, this time allegations of being a threat to the very nation they desire to make great once again.
The most common refrain is the accusation Trump and his supporters represent a danger to democracy. Recent headlines include “Trump wins the 2024 election. Can democracy survive this?”[3] and “Trump Is a Threat to Democracy and Saying So Is Not Incitement.”[4] The talking point has reached across party lines, as supporters of the president-elect have attempted to turn the allegation in the opposite direction. Elon Musk, a leader of the soon-to-be-formed Department of Government Efficiency, argued that those “who say Trump is a threat to democracy are themselves a threat to democracy.”[5] Such rhetoric is commonplace for one simple reason: it has proven to be effective. A poll conducted in March of last year revealed an “alarming number of Americans across party lines share a deepening fear that our very system of government is under threat.” At a time in our history when it is rare for most people to agree about anything, an astounding 81 percent of respondents admitted “they believe democracy in America is currently being threatened.”[6] How should Bible-believing, God-fearing patriots respond?
Attention should be turned away from determining who is posing a threat to democracy by examining if America has ever even been a democracy. Our nation is certainly in danger of being fundamentally transformed into something other than what it was created to be, but we should not wring our hands in despair over the future of democracy. Instead, we should ask what actions and ideologies threaten our constitutional republic. While modern-day philosophers pretending to practice political science claim those words have identical meaning, they are certainly not the same. The venerable Noah Webster, founding father and creator of the American Dictionary of the English Language, defined republic as “a state in which the exercise of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people.” Within the entry of that same word, he clarified that a republic “differs from a democracy or a democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person.”[7] In modern terms, a democracy is a government in which the citizens vote on all policy decisions but in a republic, representatives chosen by citizens make those decisions on behalf of the people. The millions of Americans who voted in the recent election were selecting public servants to make decisions for us, just as our republic has always functioned. That is why the Pledge of Allegiance never mentions democracy but instead the republic for which the flag stands.
If a second opinion is desired, the best panel of experts to consult would be the collection of patriots who met in Philadelphia in 1787 to solve the problems faced by a young nation still operating under the tentative government established during the revolution. For over 3 ½ months they debated what form of government would be best for America, producing what Alexander Hamilton, a delegate from New York and America’s first Secretary of the Treasury, called “a system which without the finger of God never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests.”[8] An inspection of the notes taken by several delegates to the convention reveals that in their search for a solution to the nation’s problems, democracy was never considered. In fact, so much concern existed about proponents of democracy attempting to undermine the republic that our Constitution stipulates the type of government required within every state: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.”[9] This clause was specifically added to prevent any state from adopting democracy and attempting to influence others to follow their example.
Quotes from the delegates at the convention who expressed their beliefs about democracy are bountiful. Gouverneur Morris, a delegate from Pennsylvania who spoke more than anyone else at the Constitutional Convention, expressed his negative view in a speech given to commemorate the fall of Napolean: “And thou too, Democracy! savage and wild! … thou who wouldst bring down the virtuous and wise to the level of folly and guilt! thou child of squinting envy and self-tormenting spleen! thou persecutor of the great and good!”[10] James Madison, the principal architect of the Virginia Plan, which included many ideas incorporated into the Constitution, would later become the nation’s 4th president. He is often referred to as the “Father of the Constitution” because of the central role he played in calling for the convention and ensuring that the system it produced would be ratified by the states. In one of several essays written in support of the Constitution, he observed “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.” He explained that a republic “promises the cure” for the situation in America because of the “points in which it varies from pure democracy.”[11]
In no way should these condemnations of what Madison referred to as pure democracy be understood to mean the founders were not in favor of empowering the people. It was this group of men who opted to begin the Constitution with the famous phrase, “We the People.” They were not against democratic elements within the constitutional republic but they were passionately opposed to a complete (or pure) democracy. Their debate concerned how democratic the republic should be, as illustrated by the compromise involving the process of selecting members of Congress. Some desired the state legislatures to be solely responsible for determining who would be in both the House and Senate; others thought the people themselves should decide. The final agreement was that senators would be selected by state legislatures and members of the House of Representatives elected by the people. In that way, the House was formed as the more democratic body but the entire system was nothing less than a full republic. Over a century later, during the Progressive Era, the 17th Amendment established the direct election of both houses of Congress by the people. That change made our republic more democratic but not a democracy.
Other voices from the founding era echo a distaste for pure democracy. Fisher Ames, the congressman who authored the final wording of the First Amendment, referred to democracy as “a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction.” He further explained: “The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness [excessive indulgence of liberty with no regard for morality], which the ambitious call, and the ignorant believe to be liberty.” He acknowledged the consensus of those who produced the Constitution, explaining, “The great object, then, of political wisdom in framing our constitution, was to guard against licentiousness, that inbred malady of democracies, that deforms their infancy with grey hairs and decrepitude.”[12] The framers understood democracy would be destined for failure after a relatively short life, a conclusion reached by many prominent figures in the nation’s infancy. John Adams, absent from the convention due to his duties as the ambassador to England, explained his views in a letter written in 1814: “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy.”[13] His son and our 6th president, John Quincy Adams, reiterated this view, observing the “experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived.”[14] Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, called democracy “one of the greatest of evils”[15] and the aforementioned Noah Webster pronounced it as “often the most tyrannical government on earth.”[16] The number of quotations from the Founding Era condemning democracy is plentiful indeed which begs the question: Why do so many Americans today view democracy as something worthy of defending?
Much of the modern-day confusion about the meaning of democracy stems from its ever-changing meaning. Pundits and politicians often use the term in a generic sense to differentiate between forms of government giving a voice to the people and those which give no voice to the masses such as a monarchy or dictatorship. As one example, Ronald Reagan became the first American president to address the British Parliament in 1982, giving a speech in which he called for a global campaign to spread democracy.[17] He was not soliciting our mother country to overthrow the American republic but instead calling for a fight against oppressive governments in places such as the Soviet Union. In what may be best described as sloppy speech, countless numbers of Americans who sincerely believe in the Constitution have made similar linguistic mistakes, seemingly unaware they are falling into a trap laid by the enemy. Have you ever heard someone ask incredulously, “Don’t we live in a democracy?” when they desire to be able to get away with something deemed illegal by those elected to serve in the legislature? That question never seems to be asked by someone operating inside the bounds of our governmental system but always by those attempting to undermine it. That is not a coincidence. In fact, it is very prophetic. It is essential for the end time generation to understand something more than semantics is at stake.
Those who desire to force this great nation to bow its knee to the one-world socialistic government laugh with glee at the prospect of America transitioning into a pure democracy. Just as our founders recognized a republic was the best safeguard for the extreme emotional swings of public opinion that can destabilize any nation, the enemies of America’s God-given destiny understand full well how a democracy could derail the plans God has for us. Consider how much easier it would be to convince half of America socialism is a good idea than a party openly committed to socialism taking complete control of our governmental system. A democracy could embrace socialism and world government in a single nationwide vote but in our republic the socialist party would have to hold the presidency, have a majority in the House of Representatives and hold at least 60 seats in Congress to overcome the possibility of a filibuster. Then, the sitting Supreme Court justices would have to be convinced to completely ignore the Constitution. While changes detrimental to the godly character of our nation have occurred in our lifetimes, even the radical politician who boldly proclaimed just before his victory in the 2008 presidential election to be “five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America”[18] was unable to fully implement all of his destructive ideas. Our system of government was designed to specifically prevent such widescale changes of the American republic within a single generation.
However, the procedural speedbumps so eloquently designed by the greatest American minds of the 18th century were viewed not as wisdom to revere but as an annoyance to dismiss by progressive politicians of the 20th century. Chief among those who desired to undermine the Constitution was Woodrow Wilson, a former college president who viewed the Constitution through the lens of evolutionary theory. When commenting upon the ideas held by the framers, Wilson declared that the “trouble” with their view is that “government is not a machine, but a living thing.” He objected to the very idea of principles that are true for every generation, arguing the role of government “falls, not under the theory of the universe, but under the theory of organic life.” For that reason, he appealed “to Darwin, not to Newton” and proposed that our Constitution should be “modified by its environment, necessitated by its tasks, shaped to its functions by the sheer pressure of life.”[19] This philosophy resulted in wholesale changes during his administration, including the previously mentioned 17th Amendment. Wilson was an advocate for the radical change of how senators were elected because it weakened the American republic, shifting the balance of power established by the founders by allowing public opinion to carry greater weight than the collective wisdom of elected officials. As a champion of the League of Nations, the modern world’s first serious attempt at world government, Wilson enthusiastically supported every move toward a pure democracy. The reason, as stated in his own words, is rather shocking: “It is very clear that in fundamental theory socialism and democracy are almost if not quite one and the same.”[20]
The plain truth is this: The closer America moves away from its foundation as a republic and towards a full democracy, the more our nation resembles the one-world government soon to be ruled by the Antichrist. The manipulation of language is a tool commonly used by the enemies of America, as seen by the definitions recently given to words such as “racism” and “woman.” The plan to weaponize the definition of “democracy” is very similar. If public opinion can be swayed to accept the usage of the word “democracy” to describe our republic, the transition to a pure democracy can be accomplished with little notice. Their goal is for most Americans to assume the nation has always been a democracy and therefore look upon those bemoaning the loss of our republic as the ignorant ones. Those who have a love for the Word of God and America cannot afford to be silent. Now is the time to stand up even if it means we stand out. We should be proud of being a threat to the plans of the enemy to destroy our republic by replacing it with socialism in the guise of democracy, a modern-day wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Our responsibility is perhaps best illustrated by a popular story concerning Benjamin Franklin. At the close of the Convention, he stepped out of Constitutional Hall and took a seat on a nearby bench. A woman approached him and inquired, “Well, Dr. Franklin, what have you done for us?” Franklin quickly responded, “My dear lady, we have given to you a republic —If you can keep it.”[21] It is our responsibility to do just that as a nation and no one should be better equipped for the task than the Endtime audience. Let’s stop the drift into socialism by boldly declaring ourselves to be a danger to –idemocracy, just like those Founding Fathers who gave us a republic!
[1] Angie Holan, “In Context: Hillary Clinton and the ‘basket of deplorables’,” Politifact, The Poynter Institute, Published September 11, 2016, https://www.politifact.com/article/2016/sep/11/context-hillary-clinton-basket-deplorables/.
[2] Aamer Madhani and Zeke Miller, “AP sources: White House altered record of Biden’s ‘garbage’ remarks despite stenographer concerns,” Politics, AP, Updated November 1, 2024, https://apnews.com/article/biden-garbage-transcript-puerto-rico-trump-326e2f516a94a470a423011a946b6252.
[3] https://www.vox.com/2024-elections/382696/donald-trump-wins-2024-election-results-democracy
[4] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/trump-is-a-threat-to-democracy-saying-so-is-not-incitement.html
[5] Mark Scolforo, “Elon Musk says the real threat to democracy is the people who accuse Trump of endangering it,” AP. Politics, Updated October 27, 2024, https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-trump-jan-6-insurrection-ballots-a2288cae45f3caf9e7b9bc3c96c94b66.
[6] “NEW POLL: 81% of Voters Believe Democracy is Threatened,” Institute of Politics and Public Service, Georgetown University: McCourt School of Public Policy, Published March 21, 2024, https://politics.georgetown.edu/2024/03/21/new-poll-81-of-voters-believe-democracy-is-threatened/
[7] Webster, Noah. An American Dictionary of the English Language (Foundation for American Education, 2020), repr. of G&C Merriam Company, 1828. “republic.”
[8] Alexander Hamilton, “To Mr. Childs, Wednesday, October 17, 1787,” in The Federalist and Other Contemporary Papers on the Constitution of the United States, ed. E.H. Scott (Foresman and Company, 1894), 646, https://archive.org/details/federalistandot00scotgoog/page/n4/mode/2up.
[9] U. S. Const. art. IV, § 4.
[10] Henry Adams, History of the United States of America During the Second Administration of James Madison (Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1891), Chapter I, https://www.gutenberg.org/files/73057/73057-h/73057-h.htm.
[11] James Madison, “The Federalist Number 10, 22 November 1787,” Founders Online, National Archives, Accessed November 14, 2024, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0178.
[12] Fisher Ames, Works of Fisher Ames (T. B Wait and Company, 1809), 24, 384, https://archive.org/details/worksfisherames00amesrich/mode/2up
[13] John Adams, “Letter to John Taylor April 15, 1814,” in The Works of John Adams, ed. Charles Francis Adams (Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1851), https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/adams-the-works-of-john-adams-vol-6
[14] John Quincy Adams, “The Jubilee of the Constitution: A Discourse (1839),” Lonang Institute, Accessed November 14, 2024, https://lonang.com/library/reference/jqadams-jubilee-constitution-1839/
[15] Benjamin Rush to John Adams, July 21, 1789, The Letters of Benjamin Rush, ed. L. H. Butterfield (Princeton University Press for the American Philosophical Society, 1951), I:523.
[16] Noah Webster, The American Spelling Book: Containing an Easy Standard of Pronunciation: Being the First Part of a Grammatical Institute of the English Language, To Which is Added, an Appendix, Containing a Moral Catechism and a Federal Catechism (Isaiah Thomas and Ebenezer T. Andrews, 1801), 103-104.
[17] Ronald Reagan, “A Campaign for Democracy, June 7, 2022,” Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute, Accessed November 15, 2024, https://www.reaganfoundation.org/programs-events/webcasts-and-podcasts/podcasts/words-to-live-by/a-campaign-for-democracy/
[18] Barack Obama, “Obama: Transforming America,” Real Clear Politics, Victor Davis Hanson, Published October 1, 2013, https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/10/01/obama_transforming_america_120170.html
[19] Woodrow Wilson, Constitutional Government in the United States (Columbia University Press, 1917), 56, https://www.google.com/books/edition/Constitutional_Government_in_the_United/Kl0-l1X4E0gC?hl=en
[20] Woodrow Wilson, “Socialism and Democracy by Woodrow Wilson – Reprinted from The U.S. Constitution, A Reader, Published by Hillsdale College,” Constituting America, Accessed November 16, 2024, https://constitutingamerica.org/socialism-and-democracy-by-woodrow-wilson-reprinted-from-the-u-s-constitution-a-reader-published-by-hillsdale-college/
[21] Burger, Warren E. “America’s Bill of Rights at 200 Years.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 21, no. 3 (1991): 453–57. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27550765.