What differentiates Republicanism from direct democracy?

The distinction between Republicanism and direct democracy primarily lies in the role of elected representatives in shaping laws and governance. In a republican system, citizens elect representatives who then make decisions and create laws on their behalf. This model emphasizes the importance of a representative body that is accountable to the electorate, allowing for a more structured and potentially more efficient process of governance, especially in larger societies.

Direct democracy, in contrast, allows citizens to participate directly in decision-making processes, often through mechanisms like referendums or initiatives, without intermediary representatives. While direct democracy can provide a vibrant form of civic engagement, it can also lead to challenges in managing complex issues that require specialized knowledge or deliberation.

The other options, which involve concepts like referendums on all major issues, restrictions on voting rights, or the promotion of absolute rule, do not accurately characterize republicanism. Instead, they represent different governance concepts or historical practices that are not essential to the fundamental nature of republicanism in comparison to direct democracy.