>Monarch is interested in long-term stability and long-term growth
>Democratic leaders only have 4 year terms before the government changes
>Monarch doesn't want people to be starving because that would mean less crops and less tax, so he keeps taxes somewhat low
>Socialdemocracies put taxes on 40% or 50% hampering growth
>Monarch can't exploit the population much or else they'll rise up
>Democracy legitimizes the ruler due to being voted so theres not as much complaints
>Under monarchy, private property was actually 100% private
>Under socialdemocracy, the state tells you what you're allowed and what you're not allowed to do with your property, and make take it from you any time they want
Discuss
Monarchies are better than republics
Robert Sanchez
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Ethan Reyes
Monarchy is gay, son of the monarch is a shit leader and the whole country suffers, when they try to rise up many people die and they dont put a new monarch in charge most likely. A monarchie is just as good as the monarch
William Jones
Yeah but they are incorruptible.
Hunter James
Ryder Clark
The individual is, in the historico-political perspective, practically powerless. The democratic principle of "one man, one vote", viewed against a background of voting masses numbering several millions, only serves to demonstrate the pitiful helplessness of the inarticulate individual, who functions at the polls as the smallest indivisible arithmetical unit . He acts in total anonymity, secrecy and legal irresponsibility.
The articulate and original person, on the other hand, has as great or small a chance to exercise his political influence under monarchy. The effective influence of such men as Leibniz, Voltaire, Hobbes, Stahl or Wagner on monarchs was at least as great as the persuasive influence of other thinkers or writers on the political masses. Yet, since the educational standards of monarchic rules are usually above average, the persuasive efforts of intellectuals, for better or worse, have greater chances in the royal framework. One would therefore expect a democratic society to see the thinker depreciated on account of his ineffectuality.
Thomas Young
> The democratic principle of "one man, one vote", viewed against a background of voting masses numbering several millions, only serves to demonstrate the pitiful helplessness of the inarticulate individual
well this only further proves that direct democracy, decentralization and small countries are the way to go.
divide each district of 100-300 people and give them a representative like in switzerland, and unpaid of course.
Benjamin Wright
Populism is the answer to plutocracy
Oliver Green
A good monarch is the best form of government, but a bad monarch (a tyrant) is the worst of all possible governments.
Monarchy > Aristocracy > Timocracy > Democracy > Oligarchy > Tyranny
Joshua Wright
how is aristocracy different from oligarchy?
isn't oligarchy a type of aristocracy?
also where does this place representative democracy, wich is what we have?
because traditional greek democracy only used politicans as representatives and didnt give them any power like our current representative democracy does
Luis Martinez
The future is feudal
>small communities of inter-related families
>own and control large amounts of land
>land and other assets are held in trust
>trustee is appointed for life and must manage the trust for the benefit of the householders
>succession through eldest son
>include means of redressing grievances, petitioning the trustee, etc in original agreement
>you get the idea
Smart families are already organizing themselves this way, and they will inevitably find reason to band together with like minded families nearby.
Kevin Hernandez
Even a king needs consulants and the king is a human too. No system is safe for corruption
John Martinez
How about we have a Dictatorship
Camden Mitchell
Bring back absolutism. Please, don't follow our example and get yourself a good ol' absolute monarch.
Kayden Smith
In Democracy those consultants also throw millions ($) at candidates which would mean nothing to a monarch.
Dylan Myers
Monarchy with 'adopted heir is probably best system. Current monarch picks his successor. The Romans did this with much peace and prosperity during the Nerva and Antonine dynasties. Once Marcus Aurelius chose his own son Commodus as his heir is when Rome began its decline.
Having a Senate with removal or confirmation powers wouldn't be a bad idea either, so long as it was fairly restrained (say requiring 2/3 vote or something)
Ayden Howard
Aristocracy is qualified oligarchy, just like Timocracy is qualified Democracy. It's basically a form of meritocracy with a minimum property requirement. So you draw the most experienced and most knowledgeable candidates from a pool of property-owners instead of just having the absolute richest rule.
Oligarchy = rule by the richest
Aristocracy = rule by the best
As for representative democracy I think it can take on shades of any form of government. Or it might represent Aristotle's 'polity' - a mixed constitution which picks alternately from democratic and oligarchic government forms.
Evan Gomez
The form of government matters less than the moral strength of the people. Heading in the feudalism direction allows us to congregate into tight groups of mutually-interested and interdependent communities that can develop a virtuous people worthy of ruling themselves.
Luke Allen
Another downside of democracy
>candidates must spend millions in costly campaigns in order to even have a chance at winning
>the "rule of the people" is actually the rule of a few, wich are chosen by the people but dont have any law that makes them fulfill their promises
i see, thanks for clarifying
if we look at the first republican constitutions like the french constitution or the american constitution, the word "democracy" was not used once, thats because they are representative governments and not full democracies.
in this representative governments, its no different from the classes in medieval europe except the person on top is chosen by the people.
in true greek democracy, the representatives would need the approval of the people to approve a law, instead of simply choosing to push forward any law without asking the population (Spain)
Matthew Cook
Democracy is the reign of mediocrity. Defending democracy is saying that opinions of an uncultured man is worth as much as a good man's convictions
Logan Powell
Democracy becomes garbage as soon as women and subhumans are allowed to vote.
Carter Long
democracy is populist by nature, even before the weak sex is allowed to vote its already populist
its the "dictatorship of the majority" but actualy the dictatorship of whoever the majority chose
Austin Walker
A democracy is actually just a decentralized monarchy, but you end up with a lot more people thinking they can rule over you, and thus they devise ways to squeeze goodies from the population, and this tendency slowly grows over time, creating an overbearing state and bloated aministrative sector. A perfect example is in universities. Fees have gone WAAAAY up, the quality hasn't, but the administrative staff is bloated with frivolous positions, yet they draw a salary, paid for by young broke people. It's way worse than what a monarchy would do, which could be overthrown. The decentralized monarchy of democracy is a miasma that you can't attack, but is continually attacking you.
Jackson King
But new tech maybe will change everything.
en.wikipedia.org
Samuel Sanchez
>Monarch is interested in long-term stability and long-term growth
..in theory, in practice they were chasing mistresses and wasted enormous funds on frivolities, the good kings tried to do so but were actively hindered by the aristocracy that for the most part did what the bad monarchs did
>Democratic leaders only have 4 year terms before the government changes
I give you that but a bad government for 4 years is better than a bad government for a lifetime.
>Monarch doesn't want people to be starving because that would mean less crops and less tax, so he keeps taxes somewhat low
What he wanted he got, usually what he wanted was of personal nature. During monarchies famines were common, while I give you that our technological level was low.
>Socialdemocracies put taxes on 40% or 50% hampering growth
Can't argue with that, thus I am not a leftie.
>Monarch can't exploit the population much or else they'll rise up.
Quite the opposite, there were far more rebellions against kings than were against democracies. Since people are not really forgiving toward unelected royalty that fucks up.
>Democracy legitimizes the ruler due to being voted so theres not as much complaints
yes, thus the above point
>Under monarchy, private property was actually 100% private
lolno, the kings and lords were known to take what they wanted. As a subject your property was owned by the crown as a god's appointed custodian of the realm.
>Under socialdemocracy, the state tells you what you're allowed and what you're not allowed to do with your property, and make take it from you any time they want
so, basically the same as during the monarchy but instead with god, they justify it with social equality
All in all naaah. Monarchy played it's course. Some china like capitalist authoritarianism could yield better economic results than modern democracies but that is to be seen if the model could last.
Samuel Morales
>During monarchies famines were common
until industrial revolutions, there were famines every 20 years on average. its less to do with the type of government imo.
Brandon Collins
Why not have both :)
Ryan Allen
Bump
Isaiah Cruz
Yes, but only an absolut monarchy
Matthew Thomas
The majority is not, as a group, the most intelligent. We live in the age of propaganda and as such should be taken into account. People are easy to win over of you play their biases or striaght up lie to them. Convince the average man he's right and you got a life long voter. Democracy then leads to some form of absolute rule, dictatorship or life long rule (keep getting voted in)
Bentley Reyes
>no kings
Cameron Bell
100% agree OP. Our democratic republic here was founded by freemason lodges in Paris during the revolution and it's the fucking worst regime possible.
Jaxon Wood
It's much harder to argue against the system, so they have to imply correlation = causation.
Nolan Lee
>being ruled by someone cuz he is born there
Start thinking for yourself
Bentley Brooks
What are you arguing against?
Lincoln Carter
>213871535
>OP being retarded again
Its only effective if the one who rules is fucking benevolent or at least capable to grasp the tasks of statecraft.
ps divine right is a thing of the past, majority of the west doesnt during the past decades gave up on religion.
Hunter Murphy
Oh sheesh. Wrong quote.
Lucas Reed
Monarchy has ensured that Spain will bend over the EU and suck Germanys dick while crumbling in pieces because of a turism based economy.
Brody Morris
NRx gang represent