Dan Smoot Report, 1966.
It is accurate to say, (i) the United States is a Constitutional Republic, (ii) that Constitutional Republic is not a form of Democracy but contains the democratic element, and (iii) that United States is not a Pure Democracy but a democratic republic and mixed constitution blending elements of monarchy, democracy and monarchy. The argument from ultraconservatives, as in this case, Dan Smoot in the Cold War era lies within a particular constitutional theory defending an anti-Civil Rights and anti-egalitarian argument.
“The ideal of a constitutional republic is individual liberty. In this century, great strides have been made toward the goal of subverting our republic, and transforming it into a democracy. The foremost tactic of the subverters is subversion of “language” — by calling America a democracy, until people thoughtlessly accept the term, and use the term. Totalitarians have obscured the real meanings and principles of American government.” (Dan Smoot)
The totalitarians for him are any political forces he believes were pushing the U.S. toward centralized, egalitarian, or majoritarian democracy. This includes Communists, Marxists, Progressives, New Deal liberals, Civil Rights-era egalitarians and elite intellectuals in his day like C.L. Sulzberger and Amaury de Riencourt.
Smoot framed twentieth-century liberalism as a step toward collectivism, believing that expanding federal authority through Social Security, civil‑rights enforcement and federal education policy was part of a totalitarian drift. He believed that egalitarian democracy would lead to more centralization, although political leaders among us in our day, particularly who see themselves as “post-constitutionalists” now openly subvert and obscure these meanings as much as the accused revolutionary operatives Smoot opposed.
The major political parties mutually contribute to our political degeneration or corrosion, through their particular understandings about this country. This is an observable and historical fact. Dan Smoot’s argument is not merely against equalitarian Democracy, autocracy and direct democracy, it contains a very technical and textbook understanding of the constitution and meaning of its terminology. He highlights the growth in executive power, which actually expanded massively during G.W. Bush’s administration.
The American Minervan 