Additional information regarding the "1928 Manual": (1) Why would any American claim that our military is the final arbiter of "correct" definitions of political terminology? Since when have we adopted THAT attitude in our country? (2) The definitions used in that Manual were NOT authored by any military official. Instead, they were reprinted from a publication written by Harry F. Atwood. The Army Manual contains the following comment at the front: "This manual supersedes `Manual of Citizenship Training'. The use of the publication `The Constitution of the States' by Harry F. Atwood is by permission and courtesy of the author." (3) So, who was Harry F. Atwood? Why did the Army use quotations from his book? Did the Army use any other material? Why did the Army publish "Citizenship Training" materials? Here is what I have discovered thus far: Harry Atwood [1870-1930] was apparently a Chicago lawyer (based upon a comment I saw in a 1929 scholarly journal review of one his books). Atwood was opposed to "democracy" in its most pure form and he spoke out against all of the following: initiative, referendum, recall elections, direct primary, and the 18th Amendment to the Constitution (i.e. prohibition of sale, manufacture or distribution of intoxicating liquors). However, Atwood wrote something pertinent which everyone should ponder: One of Atwood's comments was: "Democracy is the `direct' rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success." So, Atwood made the very same distinction that was used by our Founding Fathers. Their concern regarding "democracy" was in respect to "direct rule" --- as opposed to representative or constitutional democracy in which the governed elect their representatives. Seen in this context, Atwood's opposition to referendum, recall elections, initiatives, and direct primaries also make more sense---because as a matter of principle, Atwood opposed "direct rule". He preferred the moderating influence of the slower and more cumbersome indirect rule via representatives elected by voters. Atwood wrote several books and pamphlets. However, I could find no listing at any U.S. library for the Atwood publication cited in the Army Manual by the title, "The Constitution of the States".. However, in 1927, Atwood's book entitled "The Constitution Explained" was published. It is possible that the Army Manual reference is a chapter title from that book. How and why did the Army select Atwood's writing for inclusion in its Citizenship Training materials? There is no evidence available at this time to answer that question. But let us ponder the obvious: The definitions of Democracy and Republic cited in the Army Manual are not official determinations made by the United States Army OR by any other military branch OR any branch of our government. Instead, they are simply the personal opinions of an obscure Chicago lawyer. In June 1952, the Army published "The Soldiers Guide, Department of the Army Field Manual", which contained the following: "Meaning of democracy: Because the United States is a democracy, the majority of the people decide how our government will be organized and run - and that includes the Army, Navy, and Air Force. The people do this by electing representatives, and these men and women then carry out the wishes of the people." So, if we are supposed to uncritically believe and accept as authoritative every definition or discussion published in an Army Manual then why not use the 1952 edition cited above? One last point: In the context of 1789, 'democracy' was often used as a term to distinguish between government run by monarchs (the norm) versus through popular election. Words can be defined so narrowly or so broadly that they lose all practical meaning. What did the word "citizen" mean in 1789? What did the word "voter" mean in 1789? What did the word "justice" mean in 1789? What did the word "freedom" mean in 1789? The gold-standard for definitions of words in the English language is the Oxford English Dictionary. OED provides the following definitions of democracy. It shows the earliest English usage of the word commencing in 1531. DEMOCRACY "1. Government by the people; that form of government in which the sovereign power resides in the people as a whole, and is exercised either directly by them (as in the small republics of antiquity) or by officers elected by them. In modern use often more vaguely denoting a social state in which all have equal rights, without hereditary or arbitrary differences of rank or privilege." "2. That class of the people which has no hereditary or special rank or privilege; the common people (in reference to their political power)." Political extremists such as the Birch Society claim that our Founding Fathers distrusted and detested democracy but Thomas Jefferson and James Madison named the political party they founded the "Democratic-Republican Party". Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to I.H. Tiffany in 1816, which certainly contradicts the understanding Birchers et al regarding ancient Greek "democracy" versus what our Founding Fathers thought. With respect to the Greeks, Jefferson wrote: "They had just ideas of the value of personal liberty, but none at all of the structure of government best calculated to preserve it. They knew no medium between a democracy (the only pure republic), and an abandonment of themselves to an aristocracy or a tyranny independent of the people." Birchers like Robert Welch make much of the difference between a democracy and a republic but Thomas Jefferson (as shown above) used the terms interchangeably. To Kercheval in 1816, Jefferson wrote: "I am not among those who fear the people. They, and not the rich, are our dependence for continued freedom." Hmmm---sounds like Jefferson harbored some animosity toward persons of wealth and how they might use their wealth for their own selfish interests instead of the commonweal. Does that mean Jefferson was a "socialist" in the Birch Society scheme of things? Birchers et al vehemently proclaim their belief in our "Constitutional Republic" form of government. The Ku Klux Klan also proclaims it devotion to our basic Constitutional principles. For example, see the text of the recruitment flyer most frequently used by the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan of Mississippi -- the most violent Klan in our nation's history. Among the reasons it gives for joining the White Knights are: "#8: Because it is a pro-American organization that opposes any thing, person, or organization that is un-American. #9: Because it is an organization that is sworn to uphold the lawful Constitution of the United States of America." The flyer also proclaims the KKK's devotion to: "Our governmental system is a Constitutional Republic, primarily designed to protect the Responsible Individual Citizens from all tyranny..." Obviously, GENERALIZATIONS are worthless. As discussed above, one can vehemently proclaim one's devotion to a "Constitutional Republic" while simultaneously enslaving an entire category of human beings and/or committing acts of barbarism against one's fellow countrymen. Consequently, the FORM of government should NOT be the primary concern. Instead, it is the UNDERLYING VALUES that require our scrutiny. Individuals and nations that genuinely subscribe to democratic values are indisputably more tolerant and more accepting of politically diverse ideas. Furthermore, they place more value upon human life and they more readily recognize the legitimacy of alternative viewpoints, as well as the need for compromise within society. Merely proclaiming one's belief in a "Republic" tells you nothing whatsoever!

The salient question is WHO wrote the 1928 Army Manual which is cited in this thread? The "definition" of democracy and republic used in this Manual was NOT an official determination made by our military. Instead, it apparently is a reprint of a section from something written by an obscure Chicago lawyer named Harry F. Atwood. It appears that the Manual is actually something written for citizenship training classes---although the Army connection to such subject matter is not readily apparent. The "1928 Manual" is the ONLY time such a definition was printed.