'Democracy' versus 'republic'

In France, during the later stages of WW II, there evolved a small but very effective group of anti-fascist freedom fighters to whom, in retrospect, all of us owe deep and sincere gratitude. Those youthful insurgents, using mostly home-made improvised weapons, managed to destroy, disrupt and deflate the Nazi occupation throughout much of central and southern France…undoubtedly saving thousands of allied soldier's lives and helping to expedite the war's end.

So, setting aside allusions to the present debacle in Iraq, how were these brave liberators rewarded? Believe it or not, they were each and every one of them, rounded up and quickly executed by allied expeditionary brigades: no trial, no judge, no jury.

I urge all doubtful and interested readers to research and verify this. Read "Passionate Declarations" by Howard Zinn, "The Sorrows of Empire" by Chalmers Johnson and "Deterring Democracy" by Noam Chomsky.

Alas, the horrendous underlying significance of this unreported, historical tidbit is that one form of fascism (militaristic) was violently replaced by yet another form of totalitarian control (economic). The success of corporate driven capitalism relies upon the marginalization and eradification of community orientated populist movements. Not only is Maciavillian economic elitism an ugly bastardization of "democracy," it is anathema to the very concept and survival of a "republic."

As you repeat your "Pledge of Allegiance" note that it is dedicated to the "republic," not to the "democracy" for which it stands. The implications of not knowing the difference are vast, problematic and endemic.
Larry D. Cook
Bath