Direct democracy was very much opposed by the framers of the United States Constitution and some signatories of the Declaration of Independence. They saw a danger in majorities forcing their will on minorities. As a result, they advocated a representative democracy.
Alexander Hamilton said, "That a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure, deformity."
The Framers of the Constitution feared that the use of tyranny by the majority could create problems. In other words, the majority could use their power to take away the rights of the minority, as an act of tyranny.
Government is not what the federalists feared to be the most apparent source of tyranny. The federalists supported the idea of government. They actually believed that the most apparent source of tyranny was the Majority Rule - that is to say they thought that the popular majority would be able to unite and "trample on the rules of justice". It was the anti-federalists who believed that government was naturally tyrannical.
They feared an overpowering democracy could be tyrannical.
Roger Sherman feared democracy and felt the common people were stupid.
They feared the government would take away their individual rights and eventually lead to tyranny. They feared it would be like Britain all over again. :)
Pure democracy essentially means that majority opinion rules; the Framers feared that this would oppress the rights of minorities. So, they provided a framework for a republican form of government, consisting of elected representatives.
He feared Caesar's tyranny towards Rome after being crowned.
James Madison feared the domination of a powerful majority and the potential for tyranny. He was concerned that a majority faction could oppress the rights of minority groups or individuals. To address this, Madison advocated for a system of checks and balances to limit the power of the majority and protect individual liberties.
The US has a representative democracy because, at the time the Constitution was framed, it was impracticable to have a direct democracy. Additionally, the Founding Fathers were generally skeptical of democracies (since they understood it differently than we did) and feared the tyranny of the majority. They believed a representative democracy would temper the passions of the masses.
Pure democracy, as our Founding Fathers knew and feared, is a very poor form of government. Democracy is 3 tigers and a goat voting on what's for dinner. Slavery was OK under a democracy, and the majority opinion has been wrong time after time. It has been said once the electorate understands they can vote to take money from those who earn it, and through legislation, give it to those who do not, that government is doomed. That is why we have a representative republic form of government. Describing ourselves as a "Democracy" didn't start until late in the 20th century.
The Framers knew the direct and pure form of democracy and they feared that the emotional decisions taken by the populace; which is called unrestricted Majority Rule; may violate the individual rights. Therefore they chose the republic form of government in which the people choose individuals to represent them and transform their will into rational and reasonable decisions. after many amendment in the US constitution the government became a democratic republic.. or what we can call "representative or liberal democracy".A republic as opposed to a pure democracy
Obviously not since they created a representative democracy. What they rejected, because they feared mob rule, was direct democracy with the people as a whole exercising the functions of government. Michael Montagne