There are many issues involved in what a constitutional representative republic is. To understand the most basic issues requires a good grounding in civics education. There is a central issue involved in a representative republic where consent of the governed is paramount. That central issue is: can we base the idea of consent of the governed on the idea that we can give our agreement to use the government to do anything at all with only the consent of a majority of voters as the only check on government power or is the check on government power limited by a more fundamental issue centered on the issue of rights and the question of what can we rightfully consent to?
America lost sight of this back in antebellum times with the issue of slavery. Abraham Lincoln answered the argument that popular sovereignty, “democracy” (ie, the will of the majority) the vote for slavery is all that the moral standing of the institution of slavery requires to be law. Lincoln answered this argument for slavery with the principle stated in the Declaration of Independence that all Men are created equal and that no matter what we cannot rightfully give our consent to enslave another. This understanding, the basic idea that the government is limited by that which can be rightfully consented to is the foundation of the rebirth of freedom in Lincoln’s time and in any time. The fundamental idea that the first check on government isn’t the constitutional separation of powers of the branches of government but is instead the adherence to the principle that legitimate government is that which is limited first and foremost by that which we can rightfully consent to.
Limited government is limited by that which we can rightfully consent to.
Once that grounding is lost the government becomes our worst enemy rather than the instrument for the protection of our individual rights.
If we can consent to anything then we have an unlimited democracy or, as Senator Stephen A. Douglas put it “popular sovereignty” which he argued is all the moral standing the institution of slavery required. His idea of democracy is what the democrats of today refer to as “our democracy”: the idea that consent of the governed is unlimited and a legitimate government is legitimized by simply what a majority or their representatives vote for.
America lost sight of this back in antebellum times with the issue of slavery. Abraham Lincoln answered the argument that popular sovereignty, “democracy” (ie, the will of the majority) the vote for slavery is all that the moral standing of the institution of slavery requires to be law. Lincoln answered this argument for slavery with the principle stated in the Declaration of Independence that all Men are created equal and that no matter what we cannot rightfully give our consent to enslave another. This understanding, the basic idea that the government is limited by that which can be rightfully consented to is the foundation of the rebirth of freedom in Lincoln’s time and in any time. The fundamental idea that the first check on government isn’t the constitutional separation of powers of the branches of government but is instead the adherence to the principle that legitimate government is that which is limited first and foremost by that which we can rightfully consent to.
Limited government is limited by that which we can rightfully consent to.
Once that grounding is lost the government becomes our worst enemy rather than the instrument for the protection of our individual rights.
If we can consent to anything then we have an unlimited democracy or, as Senator Stephen A. Douglas put it “popular sovereignty” which he argued is all the moral standing the institution of slavery required. His idea of democracy is what the democrats of today refer to as “our democracy”: the idea that consent of the governed is unlimited and a legitimate government is legitimized by simply what a majority or their representatives vote for.
Statistics: Posted by Margaret — 5/28/2025, 12:22 pm — Replies 2 — Views 1634