User blog comment:Reximus55/Government Series - Introduction/@comment-29118948-20131024053317/@comment-32656-20131025131047

Of course, the "type" comparison needs to be taken within reason. After all, if you go far enough back with categories, then you have entirely unrelated things being in the same bunch, and that simply does not work. For example, Dogs and Cats are unquestionably not the same thing, but if you go back in categories, they are both in the same categories, such as "Carnivores."

As for your comparison, Ms, a "PC" is generally defined as being a computing device that uses a Windows operating system. A "Mac," however, is one that uses a Macintosh operating system. Other examples would be things like the "Linux" operating systems. If that is your usage, then of course not.

If you're using the other definition of "PC," as in "Personal Computer," then they are pretty much the same. All it is is a difference of brands, come down to it. Perform the same functions, after all.

That's only half the definition of both those terms, Red. If you include the other half, then they agree with each other. Heck, that's not the general definition of either, or the one that Rex or Ms is using.

Those definitions have been included elsewhere on this blog.

For "Republic," yours misses "or other hereditary head of state" at the end of it. For "Democracy" you don't have a single thing about "the people" - your definition is about a third of the actual one.

Given the conditions to be a republic, by definition that means that they are elected - i.e. a democracy.

Moreover, voting power in a republic is equal. Each person has a single vote, not multiple.

So yes: They can be defined as a type of the one another.

The concept of a square as a "type of rectangle" is greatly exaggerated. The two things are completely separate types of quadrilaterals.

"Being a dog" is the same as "being an animal." Vice-versa is not true, but that statement itself is true - a dog is a type of animal, after all.

Such logic is always the case. Basically never works uphill, but always works downhill.

No "dictatorship" is a "republic." The two are basically the exact opposite thing.

Just because a dictatorship has the support of the people doesn't make it a republic. Dictatorships are not a body of citizens chosen by the people. Even Germany under Hitler was not that. The second that he suspended the legislative body it ceased to be a republic. Heck, he changed the name of the state.

The second that it stops acting like a republic, it ceases to be one, no matter the name. They then either turn into what amounts to a monarchy, or a simple dictatorial state, depending on the method by which the ruler changes.