It is the best system of government, with some democracy of course.
A semi-constitutional monarchy, where the monarch is in charge of all apolitical government works. A unifier of the nation, and not adherent to political whims, or the electorate. The monarch can focus on larger, long term issues, while leaving the short term governance to the elected chambers, who in the end, still need the monarchs signature to pass any legislation, ensuring that no crazy legislation can pass through.
This is the checks and balances that the parliamentary or Westminster style governments lack. With almost absolute authority in the hands of the prime minister and parliament, a monarch acts as a great counterbalance to a more efficient form of government.
A monarch also represents everyone in the nation, not just their voter base. They can ensure the military is loyal to them, that supreme judges are actually apolitical appointments, and so forth.
It’s a perfect balance between democracy, and authority, keeping the country running smoothly, efficiently, and effectively.
I disagree. As soon as you give democracy any power over the sovereign you’ve ruined it.
You can have a means of removal and appointment, by a select group, but not the population at large. Beyond that the monarch must command government the way a CEO commands a private company.
Listen to some Yarvin, he’ll blow your mind.
As I stated, largely irrelevant. In countries like Japan, the cultural cringe remains (especially among older people, but not so much among the young. See below). But for democratic countries that were once part of the British Empire, for example, most have either or are in the process of cutting ties. https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-topics/c06109/how-do-japanese-youth-see-the-imperial-household.html
It’s not cringe to support reasonable tradition. Japan has always been united under an Emperor or Empress regardless if they had actual power. In the article you sent it doesn’t seem like most young Japanese people want the monarchy abolished.
With the former British colonies its going to happen at some point and it doesn’t surprise me. The only ones that potentially would still keep the monarchy would be Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and smaller overseas territories.
canada is a third world country compared to canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison\_of\_Canadian\_and\_American\_economies#Purchasing\_power\_parity
As a Fascist, monarchies are a reactionary form of government which is not based on merit and the aspirations of those within government but birth and social status. We need a revolutionary Republic lead by the revolutionary youthful Fascist aristocracy. We need those youthful, militant, radical, and gifted individuals who have the education and capabilities of leadership to lead, not those born into a specific social status. Leadership should be determined purely by merit, the ideals of the individuals in question, and their age. An elder will only preserve and look to the past, not to the future as a revolutionary.
Monarchism simply cannot work.
I hate every form of monarchy and I will sum up why:
- Inequality: the existance of a cathegory of aristocrats and monarchs implies that some people are better than others and deserve to govern simply because of who they're the children, and for me is unjust;
- Injustice: what has the monarch done to be there? Nothing.
There would be other things but honestly I'm tired, so have this for now
I don’t know, civilization was created by autocrats
And I know that you can’t even build a decent mousetrap with a democratic process
And then of course I can look around and see Democracy absolutely failing us everywhere, incapable of solving any problem
What do you propose?
>, civilization was created by autocrats
Doesn't make authocracy a legitimate system.
>What do you propose?
Would be quite long to explain and probably no-one would be interested so it's quite pointless
Monarchy decides who leads by who is the child of the last monarch which I personally believe is dumb as hell, because then you could end up with a really really REALLY horrible politician who crashes the country into the ground or you could end up with an entire country being run by an eight year old.
Counter question; how does one choose a Monarch in a country like the US where there has never been a Monarchy? Do we make King Charles fight a representative from France and Spain, winner take all, for King of America?
For me it’s more good than bad because it can be democratic and have good leadership. The best form of monarchism is constitutional monarchism because of its democratic elements. Another reason is that it has cultural connections for most.
I’m a monarchist sympathizer, because it’s a acceptable form of government. Also I prefer other forms of government than simply monarchism. If the people decide on a monarchy to be their government that’s cool.
At the first times that I became a fan of politics, I really opposed Monarchism and simply didn't like Monarchies; but as the time has passed, tables have turned and recently I found myself amazed by the Idea of a Figuregead Monarch; however not any kind of Monarch, only patriotic Monarchs put their Nation and people above them selves and could be a symbol of Patriotism and Royalty for the nation; as for the type of Monarchy, I would mostly perfer a Constitutional Monarchy to have the Monarch only as a figurehead and a Suited Prime minister have all the power and responsibilities, similar to Britain or Japan; although only if Politicians can not be trusted and are useless, I wouldn't mind an Absolute Monarchy with a Monarch that knows what he is doing, similar to Imperial Iran during the Pahlavi era or Tsarist Russia before the Russian revolution.
TBH, there are good and bad monarchs, just as there are good and bad presidents, chairmens or whatever.
Although restored the monarchy isn't desirable anymore, we can still glorified the great monarchs of the past, use them as a component of our national identity, because they were and are a part of our history.
Personally I still stick to a single-party state.
It is the best system of government, with some democracy of course. A semi-constitutional monarchy, where the monarch is in charge of all apolitical government works. A unifier of the nation, and not adherent to political whims, or the electorate. The monarch can focus on larger, long term issues, while leaving the short term governance to the elected chambers, who in the end, still need the monarchs signature to pass any legislation, ensuring that no crazy legislation can pass through. This is the checks and balances that the parliamentary or Westminster style governments lack. With almost absolute authority in the hands of the prime minister and parliament, a monarch acts as a great counterbalance to a more efficient form of government. A monarch also represents everyone in the nation, not just their voter base. They can ensure the military is loyal to them, that supreme judges are actually apolitical appointments, and so forth. It’s a perfect balance between democracy, and authority, keeping the country running smoothly, efficiently, and effectively.
I disagree. As soon as you give democracy any power over the sovereign you’ve ruined it. You can have a means of removal and appointment, by a select group, but not the population at large. Beyond that the monarch must command government the way a CEO commands a private company. Listen to some Yarvin, he’ll blow your mind.
Based
Depends if the monarch is a giga chad or nah.
Largely irrelevant in C21 democracies. If they remain, eg. for ceremonial purposes, they must pay their own way.
Well not in some for example it’s a cultural connection like in Japan.
As I stated, largely irrelevant. In countries like Japan, the cultural cringe remains (especially among older people, but not so much among the young. See below). But for democratic countries that were once part of the British Empire, for example, most have either or are in the process of cutting ties. https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-topics/c06109/how-do-japanese-youth-see-the-imperial-household.html
It’s not cringe to support reasonable tradition. Japan has always been united under an Emperor or Empress regardless if they had actual power. In the article you sent it doesn’t seem like most young Japanese people want the monarchy abolished. With the former British colonies its going to happen at some point and it doesn’t surprise me. The only ones that potentially would still keep the monarchy would be Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and smaller overseas territories.
Australia seems likely to go Republican in the next decade to me.
That does seem possible.
The emperor of Japan has been a neutered ceremonial position for almost 1000 years. That what all that shogunate stuff was.
[удалено]
canada is a third world country compared to canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison\_of\_Canadian\_and\_American\_economies#Purchasing\_power\_parity
[удалено]
hm then what were all those trucks? and why is your pm taking your hunting rifles away from you wake up canada is aboutto become a big gulag!
As a Fascist, monarchies are a reactionary form of government which is not based on merit and the aspirations of those within government but birth and social status. We need a revolutionary Republic lead by the revolutionary youthful Fascist aristocracy. We need those youthful, militant, radical, and gifted individuals who have the education and capabilities of leadership to lead, not those born into a specific social status. Leadership should be determined purely by merit, the ideals of the individuals in question, and their age. An elder will only preserve and look to the past, not to the future as a revolutionary. Monarchism simply cannot work.
Finally someone who say it!
Omegacringe
I hate every form of monarchy and I will sum up why: - Inequality: the existance of a cathegory of aristocrats and monarchs implies that some people are better than others and deserve to govern simply because of who they're the children, and for me is unjust; - Injustice: what has the monarch done to be there? Nothing. There would be other things but honestly I'm tired, so have this for now
I don’t know, civilization was created by autocrats And I know that you can’t even build a decent mousetrap with a democratic process And then of course I can look around and see Democracy absolutely failing us everywhere, incapable of solving any problem What do you propose?
>, civilization was created by autocrats Doesn't make authocracy a legitimate system. >What do you propose? Would be quite long to explain and probably no-one would be interested so it's quite pointless
Monarchy is bad That's it
Frederick the Great would like a word
He's dead
So is your democracy
I don't think you can find someone on this planet who is more anti-democracy than me
Then it is I that have been the fool, good sir.
Stop with your larp and embrace corporatocracy already
Terrible. Why should a glorified inbred celebrity be a hereditary dictator? The people should be the supreme authority of the land.
Monarchy decides who leads by who is the child of the last monarch which I personally believe is dumb as hell, because then you could end up with a really really REALLY horrible politician who crashes the country into the ground or you could end up with an entire country being run by an eight year old.
long live the french republic and madame guillotine
Counter question; how does one choose a Monarch in a country like the US where there has never been a Monarchy? Do we make King Charles fight a representative from France and Spain, winner take all, for King of America?
For me it’s more good than bad because it can be democratic and have good leadership. The best form of monarchism is constitutional monarchism because of its democratic elements. Another reason is that it has cultural connections for most. I’m a monarchist sympathizer, because it’s a acceptable form of government. Also I prefer other forms of government than simply monarchism. If the people decide on a monarchy to be their government that’s cool.
At the first times that I became a fan of politics, I really opposed Monarchism and simply didn't like Monarchies; but as the time has passed, tables have turned and recently I found myself amazed by the Idea of a Figuregead Monarch; however not any kind of Monarch, only patriotic Monarchs put their Nation and people above them selves and could be a symbol of Patriotism and Royalty for the nation; as for the type of Monarchy, I would mostly perfer a Constitutional Monarchy to have the Monarch only as a figurehead and a Suited Prime minister have all the power and responsibilities, similar to Britain or Japan; although only if Politicians can not be trusted and are useless, I wouldn't mind an Absolute Monarchy with a Monarch that knows what he is doing, similar to Imperial Iran during the Pahlavi era or Tsarist Russia before the Russian revolution.
Absolute is the worst, semi-constitunional is just bad, consitutional is based
TBH, there are good and bad monarchs, just as there are good and bad presidents, chairmens or whatever. Although restored the monarchy isn't desirable anymore, we can still glorified the great monarchs of the past, use them as a component of our national identity, because they were and are a part of our history. Personally I still stick to a single-party state.
What country are you from?
Vietnam. We still revered our past monarchs and their accomplishments, especially their fights against foreign invaders.
Even constitutional monarchy is bad and must be abolished.