Why monarchy?

[Maurepas]

I don't know if I'm exactly a Monarchist per se, but as of late the lack of functionality of the American Political system has certainly shaken my faith in democracy at any rate. I can see the appeal of someone being above the fray, so to speak, whom can ensure that government remains functional.

I think I'd prefer something more along the lines of Technocracy though, such as not letting some idiot anti-science nut make decisions with regard to the EPA or the various Committees on Science, and instead vesting that decision making capacity in someone actually knowledgeable on the subject.

[Martean]

Even if no one is voting the leader could still be a moron. How do you propose we keep good, smart leaders forever? Also, someone has to decide who's next in line.

By proper education, of course.

Juan Carlos I of Spain received proper education and it's as corrupt as f**k, I mean, he has had a great number of scandals in the recent years.

Monarchy doesn't work.

[Old Tyrannia]

By proper education, of course.

Juan Carlos I of Spain received proper education and it's as corrupt as f**k, I mean, he has had a great number of scandals in the recent years.

Monarchy doesn't work.

Every time a Spaniard criticises King Juan Carlos, I want to scream at them to try living in Spain between 1931 and 1975 and see if it suits them better. You owe your right to criticise the government to the former King; to then use that right to insult him and attack his family is frankly disgusting. Socialists have short memories.

[Trotskylvania]

Juan Carlos I of Spain received proper education and it's as corrupt as f**k, I mean, he has had a great number of scandals in the recent years.

Monarchy doesn't work.

Every time a Spaniard criticises King Juan Carlos, I want to scream at them to try living in Spain between 1931 and 1975 and see if it suits them better. You owe your right to criticise the government to the former King; to then use that right to insult him and attack his family is frankly disgusting. Socialists have short memories.

This is some straight up bullshit here.

Nothing makes anyone above criticism. Juan Carlos was not a saint. And while he may have played a role in Spain's return to constitutional government, this does not make him above criticism.

[The Nuclear Fist]

Every time a Spaniard criticises King Juan Carlos, I want to scream at them to try living in Spain between 1931 and 1975 and see if it suits them better. You owe your right to criticise the government to the former King; to then use that right to insult him and attack his family is frankly disgusting. Socialists have short memories.

This is some straight up bullshit here.

Nothing makes anyone above criticism. Juan Carlos was not a saint. And while he may have played a role in Spain's return to constitutional government, this does not make him above criticism.

B-but muh inbred nepotist fetish.

[Malavya]

I'm a monarchist because monarchies unite the people with an apolitical figure, a personification of the nation in a way.

[The United Neptumousian Empire]

All 3 of the poll options are applicable to me.

Monarchy is cool. It's fancy. The pageantry is an amazing spectacle. Monarchies have the coolest national symbols and police forces. Monarchy provides unity. Monarchy provides a check on the power of elected leadership.

And lastly, there is no downside to having a constitutional monarch. It costs nothing to maintain, it brings in revenue from tourism, it fosters national identity, and it is entertaining for people that enjoy the monarchy.

And it is my opinion that those who seek to abolish a constitutional monarchy are being selfish. Why should anyone want to take something away from people who enjoy it, when that thing causes them no harm, nor does it cause anyone any detriment? If you don't like the monarchy, fine, just ignore it. It doesn't affect your life in any way, nor is there any moral imperative to remove it.

[Martean]

Juan Carlos I of Spain received proper education and it's as corrupt as f**k, I mean, he has had a great number of scandals in the recent years.

Monarchy doesn't work.

Every time a Spaniard criticises King Juan Carlos, I want to scream at them to try living in Spain between 1931 and 1975 and see if it suits them better. You owe your right to criticise the government to the former King; to then use that right to insult him and attack his family is frankly disgusting. Socialists have short memories.

What?

Firstly, during 1931-1936, Spain became a democracy, for the second time in our history, and the experience 'failed' just because a bunch of far-right generals caused a civil war.

Secondly, saying the truth it's not attacking, it's saying the truth

And the ones that have short memories are the conservatives, who have forgotten that the only dictatorships there have been in this country were fascist ones, that the left has always supported democracy, and the right only when it benefited them.

[The New Lowlands]

And lastly, there is no downside to having a constitutional monarch. It costs nothing to maintain, it brings in revenue from tourism, it fosters national identity, and it is entertaining for people that enjoy the monarchy.

This is not the case.

There is very obviously a downside to having a constitutional monarch because there are people who are opposed to it. Hell, the only countries where monarchies bring in more money than they spend are the United Kingdom and potentially Arab oil states.

The Dutch, Belgian, Danish, Swedish and Norwegian monarchies (probably some of the prime examples to think about when mentioning constitutional monarchies) are drains on the national budget, and the only case where the "national identity" is "fostered" by the monarchy to the extent that keeping them around is majorly helpful or necessary is Belgium, where both halves of the country are leaning towards independence from the other. The Spanish monarchy has actually worsened relations with the Catalan minority.

[Nervium]

I'm a monarchist because monarchies unite the people with an apolitical figure, a personification of the nation in a way.

I live in Belgium, so that would be a no.

Scotland also proved that the monarchy is a very sensitive and not at all "apolitical personification of the nation."

[Martean]

I'm a monarchist because monarchies unite the people with an apolitical figure, a personification of the nation in a way.

I live in Belgium, so that would be a no.

Scotland also proved that the monarchy is a very sensitive and not at all "apolitical personification of the nation."

And Euskadi, Catalonia...

[Keronians]

I'm a monarchist because monarchies unite the people with an apolitical figure, a personification of the nation in a way.

I live in Belgium, so that would be a no.

Scotland also proved that the monarchy is a very sensitive and not at all "apolitical personification of the nation."

Scotland did? How?

The Queen arguably took a pro-Union stance. Very subtle, though. And the Scots planned to keep the Queen as head of state if they seceded anyway.