COVER STORY 28 JULY 2026 www.goodnewsfl.org Good News • South Florida Edition As the Constitutional Convention finished its work on September 17, 1787, Mrs. Elizabeth Willing Powell asked Dr. Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got? A Republic or a Monarchy?” The good doctor answered her with the famous words, “A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it.” Mrs. Powell’s question is instructive, but also surprising to modern Americans because of what she did not ask. She did not ask if we had a Monarchy, a Republic or a Democracy. At the time of America’s founding, by common consensus, no one would have advocated for a Democracy. For the wise drafters of the Constitution, there were only two, not three, alternative regimes between which to choose. Democracy was not considered a viable option. Why? Let’s begin to answer this question with a survey of the possible political regimes or types of government. The Greeks, the classical philosophers of political government, examined all possible political regimes and concluded that all forms of government have within them the seeds of their eventual overthrow. The Greeks observed that there were only six possible regimes, three good and three bad. Logically, there could only be the rule of the one, the few or the many. Each of these three political regimes had a good form and an evil form. Monarchy Monarchy was the rule of the one. But Benjamin Franklin told Mrs. Powell that Monarchy had been ruled out in favor of a Republic. Why? The problem with a Monarchy is that, while it is possible to have a benevolent monarch, the decision to give such enormous power to one person runs a great risk. A kingdom passes from a king or queen to a son or daughter. While we might have a benevolent or good king, that king could have an evil son. A wise king like Solomon could have a fool for his son, like Rehoboam. A kingdom could be ruined suddenly—in a single generation. The framers ruled out a Monarchy because a good king like George Washington could become a tyrant like King George. They chose instead to construct a Republic, which implied a deliberate rejection of both Tyranny and Democracy. We have seen the inherent issues with a Monarchy, but why did they reject the rule of the many, a Democracy? Democracy The Greeks did not invent Democracy, as is often mistakenly claimed. But they observed it very carefully. They concluded that it too has a serious flaw that inevitably leads to its own particular social ruin. What is that flaw? A Democracy inevitably leads to financial default, government bankruptcy and social upheaval. It creates factions, promotes corruption and results in a ruinous, strife-filled social crisis.1 Unfortunately, this is a feature of Democracy, not a bug. Democracies are all on a road to ruin because they can never truly balance a budget. Why? The Greeks observed that in society there are always more poor than rich, more debtors than creditors. Wealth is power, and it tends to concentrate in the hands of the few rather than the many. But in a Democracy, the multitudes, who are poor, have the power of the vote. Social strife is inevitable in such a regime. The wealthy few find ways to manipulate the vote tally. The multitudes of the poor suffer under personal debt. Debt leads to inflation and higher taxes, which further oppress the poor, who become desperate for immediate relief. The candidates who promise the most relief and the least pain inevitably win elections in democracies. A foolish Santa Claus is always favored over a wise Grinch. Assets accumulate among the few and protect the ever fewer rich from inflation as the government inevitably debases the currency. Eventually, the poor are crushed. Debts must be defaulted upon, and entitlements, annuities and pensions are radically reduced or even repudiated altogether. Insurance too is unobtainable, and Democracy suddenly and spectacularly collapses. The Greeks understood that Democracy creates conditions that invite the emergence of a powerful tyrant who promises to stop the chaos. The fearful and desperate people settle for a “Savior” who demands total power to solve the problems of the many factions in the state. Fear spreads. Liberty dies. The Tyrant comes. The Greeks insightfully imagined that the three good and three evil regimes could be arranged on a kind of “wheel of regimes.” The typically bloody movement from an “evil” Democracy to an “evil” Tyranny was called a “revolution” of that “wheel.” A Republic with checks and balances Why did the framers of the Constitution choose a Republic, the good form of the political rule of the many? This regime mediating between a Monarchy and a Democracy offered the best prospect of the greatest liberty with the greatest possible longevity. The Constitution created a Republic, a mixed government engineered to incorporate checks and balances to restrain the destructive tendencies of both Tyranny and Democracy. These checks and balances put an institutional restraint on the three powers of government: Legislative, Judicial, and Executive. A Monarch or a Tyrant held all those powers. He announced the laws; he interpreted their meaning; and he enforced them. A good king would use these powers in the service of the commonwealth, or the public. But a Tyrant would use them to serve his own pleasure or self-dealing. The Republic that the US Constitution created had institutional checks on the executive office of the President. He could propose laws but not enact them. He could execute the laws but not interpret them. That feature restricted the threat of a Monarchy. Likewise, the President was chosen by an Electoral College, which was a deliberate restraint on Democracy, which protected the smaller states and thus served to promote social cohesion. The institution of the Senate too restrained Democracy. Wyoming, for example, would have the same number of Senators as California and thus the same influence in that chamber of Congress. to al mfa to of th lim T w m in tu tu fr te wth b fr lo a ra ti c f The United States of America at 250 Years: Are We Still a Republic? Dr. Warren Gage President, Watermark Gospel We Christians have a two-fold vision. We vow our love to our earthly country. We work and pray that God will mend her every flaw, and “guide her through the night with a light from above.” But we have heard of another Country, and so we do our service to America in light of a better, heavenly hope.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjE2MjU=