Are Republics Overrated?

My very, very latest at Lew Rockwell:

... there is something quite dishonest about republicanism. A State is not defined by the number of people it coerces, but by its borders - by the land it controls. When one person in a dynastic family claims ultimate ownership and authority over all the land, that is a monarchy. When the people as a whole claim ultimate ownership and authority over all the land, that is a democracy. A republic is, what, exactly? A small group that temporarily claims control of the land and the people on behalf of … whom? And for what?

Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s Democracy: the God that Failed does not target "pure," town meeting-style democracy, but the democratic-republican government of the large, modern nation-state. A democracy in a small town can address real problems in the community, like sanitation, zoning, and street traffic. And a King, as Hoppe wrote, would take a long-term view of his domain, as his wealth is tied to the economic health of his kingdom. But the elected politicians and professional bureaucrats of a republic are not as personally affected by their decisions as are kings or even citizens in a pure democracy. Neither the politicans nor their children will be forced to pay the bills for the unnecessary wars and wasteful entitlement programs they start.