Johnson: We're Not A Democracy, We're A "Biblical" Republic And Separation Of Church And State Isn't Real
https://www.joemygod.com/2023/10/johnson-were-not-a-democracy-were-a-biblical-republic-and-separation-of-church-and-state-isnt-real/Open linkView original on lemmy.ml897
Comments189
This “not a democracy, a republic” crap is becoming more and more popular on the right. They’re not even trying to hide the authoritarianism and fascism any more. They’re now openly saying they don’t support democracy.
It's literally "democracy = Democrats" and "a republic = republican" to them, simple as.
The Democrats should rename themselves the "Freedom Liberty" party just to fuck with em. Take back some of their words.
This is great, call it the Patriot Party or something and talk about how government waste has turned "Citizens On Patrol" into a bunch of lazy, freedom-suppressing, union members.
We already have the Libertarian party, which is the actual Freedom Liberty party.
Libertarians are more interested in simping for our corporate overlords and removing the age of consent.
Nope that's just the common Redditor's prejudice against the party based on what they read on Reddit.
I encourage you to read the actual party platform, which has none of what you described in it.
Some of us have had actual conversations with "Libertarians" and found them to be pretty much in-line with the comment. Not all of us spent our lives on a website.
It's always deregulate-fuck-you-i-got-mine sociopaths. Libertarians are about as realistic and level-headed as Anarchists. It's great on paper or for a small group but once millions of people are involved the bad actors show up and ruin it for everyone.
Again, I refer you to the party platform. That is the only definitive thing that Libertarians as a party stand for.
Your hearsay is irrelevant to that fact.
Libertarians are just republicans who do drugs and are too embarrassed to call themselves republicans.
Can't confirm. I consider myself Libertarian, I don't do drugs, and I have been voting more Democrat than Republican in the last few elections because the Republicans consistently go against my libertarian values. I had to change my affiliation to Republican to get a primary ballot (I'm in a red state, so I wanted to vote to try to limit the damage my neighbors might cause), and ended up voting Democrat in the general. Many of my Democrat friends do the same because the Democratic primary here is a joke.
There are a lot of "libertarians" that are just edgy Republicans, but I doubt they even bother changing their party affiliation. An easy litmus test is if they support Trump, they're not libertarian. That's where I draw the line, and it has been pretty effective for me.
Nope. I actually never voted for Obama. I voted for McCain in 2008, then I moved states and ended up not voting in 2012 (esp. when Ron Paul lost miserably), Gary Johnson in 2016, and then Biden in 2020.
I think Obama was a decent executive, I just don't feel like he really represents much of anything that I want. If I could replace Biden with Obama 2.0, I'd take it in a heartbeat, but I don't think any President should server >2 terms, even if it was legal.
Nah nah bud that's the dumb toddler daydream party.
A republic is a type of democracy. This guy is an idiot. 
No, republic just means that the role of head of state isn't hereditary. Lots of dictatorships are republics, some democracies are as well. The actual political system of the USA is representative democracy (in theory at least).
The fact that these terms are so muddled in the minds of the average American is completely deliberate, because it makes it so much easier for them to subvert US democracy when people have been told that the US is not one.
There are a couple definitions. One I’ve heard most is a republic has a citizen as head of state, which disqualifies both monarchies and military dictatorships. Another is that the head of state is elected or nominated, which disqualifies non-representative systems entirely.
republic /rɪˈpʌblɪk/ noun a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
from one of those Oxford ones
I just looked it up and did not find a concise definition. According to the German bpb even dictatorships can be republics.
https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/lexika/lexikon-in-einfacher-sprache/250057/republik/
Not necessarily, North Korea is technically a republic.
It's not just a Republic its a people's Republic.
So you know like way better. That's why they don't need elections it already says it belongs to the people
They literally hold elections following a concensus process.
Well cited effortpost on hexbear about the dprk: https://hexbear.net/post/196389
Sigh
Sorry you prefer to choose between bad and worse every election over reaching concensus in a constituent meeting and then voting to confirm the candidate in an election, but that doesn't make the dprk's system less democratic
That's a hell of a rant for an obvious joke comment
Fucking tankie scum
Racist "believe anything the US says about a state enemy they've previously committed genocide on" bootlicker
Two words: Tienanmen square. If you have anything that resembles a defense of that you're a POS. And you do.
No, it's not. They have a hereditary head of state who enforces his rule with control of the military.
That is why it is technically a republic, but not in practice. The constitution says it is a republic, and they actually have an election for the role of head of state, well "election", but of course in practice that is not how it works at all.
The US is also technically a representative democracy, but in practice, well...
I'm saying it's just a lying monarchy.
A pile of shit isn't a rose because you call it a rose. You're just lying.
Your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired. We are in agreement, you are just a moron who can't read.
Also I am not lying, I am stating facts.
It's not "technically" a republic because it has a hereditary ruling line. Period.
You weirdly angry goon.
Who was the third head of state again? (Hint, it isnt Kim Jung Un)
Well cited effortpost on hexbear about the dprk: https://hexbear.net/post/196389
Now I see what they got defederilized from Lemmy, so much blatant malinformation.
They literally are federated with the main lemmy instance.
The hand job place near me is also technically a foot job place.
Yeah, they really should pop open one of those dictionaries – if they know what those are – and look at the definition of republic.
Some grade 9 ass shit. A republic IS a democratic structure of government. It's representative democracy.
I think what they're getting at is that majority does not neccesarily rule in the US. You can have an election where a majority of voters go one way but the electoral college (your representation) goes another.
Idk why they want to harp on that right now but whatever.
Well, we're both. But if you had to pick just one, Republic is probably more informative than Democracy since citizens rarely actually vote for laws and usually just vote for representatives. The correct term is a combination of the two: democratic republic. Wikipedia uses the term "Federal presidential constitutional republic," which I think conveys it pretty well, though I'd prefer the term "democratic" somewhere in that word salad.
The main point is that GOP is starting to use this as justification to prevent people from electing their representatives.
Sure, the GOP absolutely twists definitions to suit their goals. You can see something similar with Democrats calling Republicans "fascists," so the problem is political theater.
That's a separate discussion from educating people on what the terms actually mean. We should be fighting misinformation on all fronts.
This take is stupidity.
When most of a party is literally pushing to overthrow the popular vote and instate an unelected autocrat, it’s ok to call it fascist.
Maybe, but it's applied so liberally (ha!) that it starts to lose its meaning. I worry that a significant portion of the population doesn't actually know what fascism means, so it's starting to lose its impact.
What else would you call it?
This isn’t a teenager calling dad a fascist for grounding them, the GOP is literally taking pages out of the historical fascism playbook.
I'm saying the term "fascist" is used for pretty much any policy the left doesn't like, such as abortion restrictions, spending cuts, etc.
Refusing to honor the results of an election is fascist. Passing policies that the left doesn't like isn't fascist. However, labeling conservatives as "fascist" is politically convenient, in much the same way as labeling progressives as "socialists" is politically convenient. I worry that the public doesn't actually understand what those terms mean, so calling out actual fascism or socialism is an issue.
This is terrifying.
This is seditious.
This is the scariest part about it
Remember when people were saying that Ron DeSantis was "very intelligent"?
Under his eye.
If the American electorate was slightly less stupid, I’d be ecstatic, because he made himself effectively kryptonite to reasonable, intelligent people with that statement.
Unfortunately, the American electorate is, on average, that stupid.
What's worse is that the average is weighted further toward stupid by gerrymandering. They're right that the game is rigged, it's just not rigged against them.
Every accusation is an admission.
Gaslight. Obstruct. Project.
Yup. That about sums it up. You guys wanna talk about something else or?
He said it in 2016 though and has still been re-elected and elected speaker of the house regardless. Hopefully this has an effect on the republican party at large though now. It might fly where he's from, but it won't in the US at large. We just need to make sure people know what they're voting for.
I work with a few atheist/agnostic republicans that are incredibly confused right now.
I'll never understand voting for the party who wants to eradicate you.
Log Cabin Republicans say "Hi."
On average? 35% of people believing lies makes us all "on average" as stupid as they are? By your own logic, you just be American
They treat the Constitution like they do their bible.
They don’t read it.
If they do read it, they just read the bits they agree with.
If they read the parts that don’t fit their desired narrative, they engage in mental gymnastics to reinterpret what was written to fit their desires.
Edit:
Which led to the Establishment Clause…
And also The point of Article 6 wherein no religious test is to be given to hold office.
Better?
From article VI (3rd paragraph)
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executige and judicial officers, both of the united states and of the several states, shall be bound by oath of affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
It literally couldn't be any clearer. I guess he's the shittiest constitutional lawyer ever. But nobody will care. They eat up his arguing from authority fallacy bullshit
They're lawyers, they are idiots and they twist every word to suit their agenda - that's what lawyers do.
Over under on this guy being a pedophile?
He's either a pedo or dogfucker, there was some statement from him about how homosexuality was bad because it makes people want to have sex with their dog.
So we have another Santorum do we? Anything need naming?
Santorum? You're telling me a person had the same name that we use to refer to that mixture of cum and lube running out of someone's asshole?
Has the word gone further than the man himself? Or do you joke?
Yes and what's even funnier is that this wasn't even common knowledge at first, there was a new story about how someone tried making a Rick Santorum character in an animal crossing game that had come out around the time, I think it was the one on 3DS.
And the game flagged Santorum as being a lewd word or slur for its online cuss word prevention. Which led to people looking it up, and figuring out what that word meant.
Here's the deets:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_the_neologism_%22santorum%22
Which I recall vividly. Dude deserved it wholeheartedly
I'm thinking he's just veeeery deep in the closet and hates himself.
Definitely fucks dogs, he might even blow goats.
Why not both?
Because I didn't want to create a space in my mind to consider a pedophile dog fucker.
puppyfucker
Those poor puppies...
I'm thinking pedo.
Why is it that every time a dumbass steps down from being speaker, you guys manage to find an even bigger wanker? It's kinda impressive, honestly.
Pump the bilge pump, get bilge water.
I don't want to be that guy, but in fairness, ol' boy didn't actually say "biblical republic" (He just wheeled out the old "constitutional Republic" bit).
Doesn't make this any better, but I want to be sure we criticize with facts.
Amen
So this is the alternative history they want to write eh?
Clown, it was called the "Enlightenment Age" for a reason, people started breaking the chains of organized religion. Yes they were Christians, but they knew enough to not trust religion as a form of government.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the material world are some of the founding principles, not "death, misery and suffering but maybe get lucky choosing the right god and you'll be rewarded with eternal paradise..."
If they founded the country on the Bible, we'd live in a theocracy with no elections and no opposition parties.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-Deism-and-Christianity-1272214
Britannica covers it pretty well. I guess they'd better, they have been covering shit for longer than we have been a country.
The phrase is "we the people."
There is nobody else coming to decide things for humans.
Of course, he's from Louisiana... The south always was the worst part of American, even in colonial times. The US might have abolished slavery much earlier if not for them. There was even a draft of the Declaration of Independence that critiqued the British slave trade as one of the moral failure of the empire and grounds for independence.
I admire your optimism.
It's less optimism & more a concrete trend if you look at the elections that have happened since the GOP destroyed Roe v. Wade.
It’s a risky strategy though.
The Clinton team admitted to elevating Trump for an easy win.
How did that go?
The Clinton team had Clinton on it. If they'd run against anyone other than Trump it would've been an even bigger slaughter.
Yeah, I don't think so Tim.
If Trump didn't drive all the moderate Republicans over to the Democrats, this guy isn't gonna do it.
Didnt almost very candidate Trump supported in the midterms lose?
No, most of them won because most of them were in uncompetitive districts.
Most of the candidates he endorsed in the few competitive districts that still exist did indeed lose, though.
Well the good news is that just because this fuckbrain said it doesn't make it true.
White Taliban gonna Taliban
Y’all Qaeda.
Christians always try to re-history the world in their favor. They are the most dishonest hypocritical fascists.
Then again, they stole most of what their religion allegedly stands for.
It's in the First Amendment. It's more important than the Second Amendment. This guy is dangerous.
Yeah. I think what these people mean usually is that the phrase "separation of church and state" isn't in the Constitution, which is true. They heard that somewhere and repeat it. Maybe that West Wing episode where Charlie does a bit about it.
Seems pretty clear to me.
Fucking excellent. I'm so sick of this ride. Life could be soooo good. Yet this shit exists
I mean, in essence, he's not wrong.
Nearly every federal legislator is Christian and votes that way. Some states still (symbolically, since they're unenforceable) ban atheists from holding public office too, not that you'd even have a chance of winning public office being openly atheist.
In what way do legislators "vote Christian"? Most of them have never read a bible, and even if they did, the bible is wildly contradictory with itself and is full of cruelty.
Yeah, you got it.
I mean that used to be true, but I imagine today, when popular culture seems pretty much against the idea of religion
That's inconsequential when the people are largely powerless.
This is literally frightening to read that any American politician would think this. I don't see how any moderate R could support this train of thought.
There's no such thing as a moderate R. They voted for Johnson.
Moderate R are an endangered and disappearing species. And even if you find one, you'd be safe to assume they're "moderate" rather than moderate.
Do they even exist? Bacon voted for Johnson.
Lots of them think it. The more frightening aspect is the willingness to say it out loud.
Remember when Cheetoh-Man said things out loud and they loved him for it. Eight years later, they feel emboldened to do all kinds of shit that wouldn't have been on the radar back then. We're in trouble.
When he won the spot he said “good to see our democracy working” or something like that. Fucking shameless lunatic
Separation of church and state is both the first amendment and a clause in article six of the constitution:
First Amendment:
article six
Thomas Jefferson's use of the words "separation of church and state" was to explain the purpose of the first amendment specifically but the actual legal text of the constitution is worded broadly enough to cover not only separation of church and state but separation of mosque/synagogue/ect and state rather than singling out Christianity.
Yo. Shit for brains. Here's the deal.
Get your god on the ballot. We'll vote for it. If it wins then maybe we'll give a listen to what it's got to say.
Otherwise keep that fucker OUT of our government.
Isn't that effectively what he's doing? A vote for him is a vote for his opinions, including that of God.
And people have been pulling this shit since religion was just thanking the forest for food.
Humans can be real pieces of shit.
No, that is not what he's doing. He's pretending to be the will of some magical sky fairy, and he is anything but that. He claims to "hear" this imaginary person "telling him what to do". That is not the same thing as a god - that is a charlatan using the snake oil of an imaginary sky fairy to con the poorly educated.
What I want is god, I don't care which one (they're all imaginary) put on the ballot and voted for. This would be decisive two ways... First, how does one get on a ballot? (they have to prove they are a real live human being, among other tests). And the second doesn't matter, because an imaginary thing can't be on a ballot.
Guillotine.
I see this nutjob has no idea what he's talking about and cannot fulfill the duties of his oath of office, so he should simply be removed from office, right? Right guys?
You got the form letter going yet?
This guy is a fuck
Hopefully this guy won't last past this election cycle.
His job isn't to last, it's tonflog whatever the Russians are paying him to do. Which will almost certainly be to jam up the government so it can't function, and to kill any Ukraine spending bills. If he can cause a civil war or constitutional crisis all the better.
I love how so many are pretending that our biggest problem is not throwing another 100 billion we don't actually have at another country's war.
It's a good thing a bunch of 6 year old children weren't murdered! Otherwise Republicans would have to pretend to care about the Constitution again!
Good luck with that Johnson, you absolute fucking moron.
Let's see how far your far-right bullshit gets you.
The American people are sick and tired of your dysfunctional inability to get anything done.
People keep saying this but I've been around since Reagan and with every election cycle things get noticeably worse. The Democrats never keep their promises and continue to cede ground. The Republicans continue ramping up their antics. People said they had enough in 88, in 92, in 96, in 2000, etc etc.
Every time the American people fell for whatever was being peddled in front of them. As someone who is almost 40, I can tell you the only time I ever thought there might be positive change and people standing up for themselves and their communities at large was during the 2020 protests and pandemic. Surely, I thought this would be the beginning of something new.
But the media began to ignore things, social media algos quickly adjusted to bury protests and boost disinfo actors. Now I have to wonder just how much worse things will get if this is what we put up with. What will it take to get people to fight for their rights. If we wait until the government makes us (LGBTQ, etc) illegal it will be too late to act.
I honestly doubt most people will be moved to do anything to defend our rights, they don't even care about their own until the police show up for them.
Is this real?
Yes. He's a former ADF lawyer, proper Christian nutjob. They say things like this. They believe this.
Bloody hell what a nightmare
I've really been in a tail spin over it. It is fucking bad.
They believe they need to "save" the rest of us from ourselves. Their (his) world view (2 people from the presidency) is pure hubris. Johnson thinks he knows better than everyone else. He's "ordained by god." Its revolting.
Good of him to accept that Joe Biden has been ordained by God! Surely now he will pay the proper respects and fall in line.
logical consistency is for heathens
How is this banal? Seems like he's doing a lot more than just trying to succeed in his career.
Also , for fuck's sake!
expired
Wow. This jackoff needs to go right now. That didn't take long. Isn't about time for Mr. Smith to start indicting these fuckers for treason?
Americans don't learn on their own faults, do they... After electing a complete idiot and criminal for a president, they give the house majority to the same party that chose Trump as their candidate (twice!) It's absolutely not surprising to me that the party that had Trump as its candidate twice, now appointed this moron as a speaker. But Americans could learn on their own faults...
"Americans dont learn on their faults do they". Every single one? You really believe 100% of americans are voting for this shit? Do you see our current president???
#NotAllAmericans
...ok? And?
Is your argument that we really should judge all Americans on what the minority of them does/did?
I judge all Americans by the film Deliverance and the Donald Trump.
You sound smart
Idk man they covered two types of Americans, how many could there possibly be? Five?
8329764
Hashtag yes that is correct motherfucker, Not All Americans. HASHTAG Not The Majority Of Americans.
Americans are now apparently all like the minority of them. Great thanks for clearing that up you judgy fuck
We are pretty fuckin' stupid.
Speak for yourself
I mean, half the country reads below a 6th grade level.
I'd say there are a lot of fucking idiots. If I'm not mistaken the number was something like 54%, so they technically make the majority.
I’m seeing lots of ‘New Speaker is [insert whatever you want that’s against humans in general] (maybe a slight over-exaggeration, but it doesn’t feel like it) But can anyone ELI5 how you all ended up in this state, and how you get back out? What’s the impact of this individual being Speaker?
Fortunately, not a whole lot.
If Democrats control the Senate.
And if he can be removed in 2024.
How we ended up here: Following Trump, an increasingly aggressive, authoritarian, what you might call fascist far right coalition has started causing problems in the house (ironically, they're called the Freedom Caucus). The Republicans are divided, but they technically have the majority along registered party lines. Because of this, the Freedom Caucus can choose to force them to do things because, without them, they can't do anything at all without crossing the aisle.
What effect it have: Mostly nothing. Democrats have a majority in the senate and hold the presidency. The house alone can't pass anything. They can vote on things and pass it on to the senate where it will die if it's bad, but that's it. They can also choose to not allow a vote on bills with bipartisan support that would pass if they didn't have control.
The largest effect will hopefully be in the elections. Hopefully people see this shit and choose to vote for something else. There's no way to know though. This could empower them potentially by allowing them to grandstand and maybe force the senate to vote against things that are poisoned to make then look bad.
I can't wait for my first chance to ask someone the following:
"I have three questions: 1. What does 'Democracy' mean? 2. What does 'Republic' mean? 3. What is your point?"
Thomas Jefferson isn't real, ya'll.
The house will decide your fate.
I AM the house!
So, uh, what are you doing here then?
He's busy Implementing his version of the will of God that just so coincidentally is exactly in line with the sick shit that he likes to do. Perfect match, that's why God put him in this place.
I'll leave it up to you to figure out if I'm serious or sarcastic
I just. Can't. Tell.
I've read somewhere else a book recommendation, and after having read it I can recommend it to you:
"Christian Nation" is an alternate history novel by Frederick Rich about the USA turned into a wholly fanatical theocracy with the necessary amendments to the constitution for it to be lawful and everything else.
From the description in one of those online book-selling websites:
Edit: I've read it in epub format on my phone.
Is that the prequel for a handmaids tale?
Nope. It's a different novel, by a different author, in a different way. Margaret Atwood is a much better writer, in my opinion, but Frederick Rich's book is, nonetheless, a real page-turner in a way that if you start reading it in the evening, get ready for a sleepless night.
The dream of the Islamic state came true
Lol that's a great visual
Cool. Cool cool cool. Glad we've got this turd as speaker 🫠
That is their origin but they mean different things.
I never thought I'd say this, but can we have Mitch McConnell back?
Assuming you're not American and are unfamiliar with our bicameral legislature: Mitch McConnell is a Republican senator from Kentucky who served as the Senate Majority Leader when Republicans held a majority in the Senate. Mike Johnson, on the other hand, is a Republican representative in the House of Representatives--the other half of Congress--who was elected to the position of Speaker by a majority of House Republicans. The Speaker is second in line to the Presidency and actually be held by anyone. However, at no time has Mitch McConnell been Speaker of the House.
If you are American: Jesus Christ go back to civics class.
Actually I am American I was just mistaken about the role Mitch McConnell played in the government I just know that he stepped down and this guy stepped back on, so I assumed this was Mitch McConnell's successor. Obviously that was an error on my part
You're confusing Mitch McConnell for Kevin McCarthy.
Yeah we got a little bit of a McDouble going on there
McConnell didn't step down from anything.
I thought he was forced out because he had..... dementia
We should only be so lucky.
That would be the correct decision, yes.
How do you confuse "Congressman" and, or "Representative" plus "speaker of the house" with "Senator" or "Senate Majority Leader"....?
I might have been smoking that pack.
I better get my gay gangbang desires out of the way before this guy gets to say anything about it. I gotta ask my wife first. She said no. Again. Well I will ask her once more and if she says no again we'll see who gets the last laugh. She said no again. Either way, I'm going to keep voting for liberals. Because someone in this country must keep the gangbang lifestyle moving forward. More gay gangbang and less war!