Monarchist Discussion Thread II: The Crown will Rise Again!

[The New California Republic]

At least democracy has some mechanisms to stop tyrants. Monarchy has random chance.

Monarchy can, and has had in the past, mechanisms to de-throne particularly bad monarchs.

The problem is that history has shown that many of those "mechanisms" actually involve all kinds of violence and cloak-and-dagger stuff that would make toes curl...

[Reikoku]

Prince Higashikuni was an admirer of the Soviet Union and its economy.

Who?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Na ... igashikuni

Not at all, monarchies are still running strong in many parts of the world. I don't “want them back,” considering the Japanese monarchy is still around.

*E M P O W E R T H E E M P E R O R*

よろずよに
かくしもがも
ちよにも
かくしもがも
かしこみて
つかえまつらむ
おろがみて
つかえまつらむ
うたずきまつる。

[Salus Maior]

Monarchy can, and has had in the past, mechanisms to de-throne particularly bad monarchs.

The problem is that history has shown that many of those "mechanisms" actually involve all kinds of violence and cloak-and-dagger stuff that would make toes curl...

Republics don't exactly have a stellar history with that sort of thing either.

And that sort of thing is less likely to happen in the modern age, at least not the same way it happened in the Middle Ages.

[Washington Resistance Army]

The problem is that history has shown that many of those "mechanisms" actually involve all kinds of violence and cloak-and-dagger stuff that would make toes curl...

Republics don't exactly have a stellar history with that sort of thing either.

Impeachment isn't that hard if there's an actual reason for it.

[Salus Maior]

Republics don't exactly have a stellar history with that sort of thing either.

Impeachment isn't that hard if there's an actual reason for it.

I'm talking corruption in general. Not just power-changes although that can also be grisly.

[The New California Republic]

The problem is that history has shown that many of those "mechanisms" actually involve all kinds of violence and cloak-and-dagger stuff that would make toes curl...

Republics don't exactly have a stellar history with that sort of thing either.

Right, but when those mechanisms are the "go-to" means of shifting power in a system, in the absence of any alternatives, it takes on an entirely different character...

[Pilarcraft]

Republics don't exactly have a stellar history with that sort of thing either.

Impeachment isn't that hard if there's an actual reason for it.

The USSR, the Nazi Germany, and the DPRK were also republics. We aren't comparing "Democracy vs Autocracy", we're comparing "Monarchism vs Republicanism"

[Washington Resistance Army]

Impeachment isn't that hard if there's an actual reason for it.

The USSR, the Nazi Germany, and the DPRK were also republics. We aren't comparing "Democracy vs Autocracy", we're comparing "Monarchism vs Republicanism"

I think it's pretty fair to call the DPRK an absolute monarchy tbqh.

[Salus Maior]

Republics don't exactly have a stellar history with that sort of thing either.

Right, but when those mechanisms are the "go-to" means of shifting power in a system, in the absence of any alternatives, it takes on an entirely different character...

Then you make alternatives that aren't that. And Monarchies did, as in the examples I just said.

[Salus Maior]

The USSR, the Nazi Germany, and the DPRK were also republics. We aren't comparing "Democracy vs Autocracy", we're comparing "Monarchism vs Republicanism"

I think it's pretty fair to call the DPRK an absolute monarchy tbqh.

In the most barebones of terms sure.

[The New California Republic]

Right, but when those mechanisms are the "go-to" means of shifting power in a system, in the absence of any alternatives, it takes on an entirely different character...

Then you make alternatives that aren't that. And Monarchies did, as in the examples I just said.

But it could be argued that the use of said alternative mechanisms is relatively rare, in contrast to the examples of violence and cloak-and-dagger means of shifting power...

[Washington Resistance Army]

I think it's pretty fair to call the DPRK an absolute monarchy tbqh.

In the most barebones of terms sure.

I mean, it nails all the important points. Kim wields absolute power over the people and state and the transfer of leadership is hereditary. Sure they claim to be a republic and whatnot but that's just window dressing.

[Pilarcraft]

The USSR, the Nazi Germany, and the DPRK were also republics. We aren't comparing "Democracy vs Autocracy", we're comparing "Monarchism vs Republicanism"

I think it's pretty fair to call the DPRK an absolute monarchy tbqh.

Yes, and the elective monarchies can be considered Republics. Technically speaking, though, The only reason there haven't been as many autocratic republics as autocratic monarchies is because Republicanism, at least in a form broader than a provincial or City level government, is relatively new. (I am, of course, ignoring Rome, etc. in this matter)

[Salus Maior]

Then you make alternatives that aren't that. And Monarchies did, as in the examples I just said.

But it could be argued that the use of said alternative mechanisms is relatively rare, in contrast to the examples of violence and cloak-and-dagger means of shifting power...

When most of your history is based in the Middle Ages, violence tends to seem very widely present regardless of whether you're a Monarchy or a Republic (such as Venice and the number of other Italian city-states).

But that's not exactly representative of the modern age, now is it? Considering how countries can be torn apart by such acts (especially in the modern age where governments and nations are far more delicate) monarchists would also prefer mechanisms that don't leave the nation wide open to instability.

[The New California Republic]

But it could be argued that the use of said alternative mechanisms is relatively rare, in contrast to the examples of violence and cloak-and-dagger means of shifting power...

When most of your history is based in the Middle Ages, violence tends to seem very widely present regardless of whether you're a Monarchy or a Republic (such as Venice and the number of other Italian city-states).

But that's not exactly representative of the modern age, now is it?

But the only way of finding out how they fare in the modern age is to start usurping republics and installing monarchies. But that seems akin to finding out if a fire is hot by thrusting one's hand into it...

[Salus Maior]

When most of your history is based in the Middle Ages, violence tends to seem very widely present regardless of whether you're a Monarchy or a Republic (such as Venice and the number of other Italian city-states).

But that's not exactly representative of the modern age, now is it?

But the only way of finding out how they fare in the modern age is to start usurping republics and installing monarchies. But that seems akin to finding out if a fire is hot by thrusting one's hand into it...

Monarchies already have existed in the modern age, and still do (and I'm not just talking about Britain). They're not shanking each other GoT style.

Nor did the Monarchies of the 19th century (at least not the big players that I'm aware of). Because, as I said, it's not in anyone's interest in the modern age to prefer that kind of wanton internal violence that can easily destroy our far more intricate, delicate, nations and societies.

And again, Republics also have a history of this, yet such is not common in the modern day.

[The New California Republic]

Monarchies already have existed in the modern age, and still do (and I'm not just talking about Britain). They're not shanking each other GoT style.

Apart from the nonsense that has been going on in Saudi Arabia recently etc. They don't need to shank each other, domestic politics has enough intrigue that can be attributed to its status as a monarchy.

Also, I am well aware that monarchies exist, but the number of absolute monarchies is relatively small.

[Salus Maior]

Monarchies already have existed in the modern age, and still do (and I'm not just talking about Britain). They're not shanking each other GoT style.

Apart from the nonsense that has been going on in Saudi Arabia recently etc. They don't need to shank each other, domestic politics has enough intrigue that can be attributed to its status as a monarchy.

Also, I am well aware that monarchies exist, but the number of absolute monarchies is relatively small.

And Republics don't?

Then you haven't been paying attention to what's going on around you in the U.S right now. Or in any number of western democracies.

[The New California Republic]

Apart from the nonsense that has been going on in Saudi Arabia recently etc. They don't need to shank each other, domestic politics has enough intrigue that can be attributed to its status as a monarchy.

Also, I am well aware that monarchies exist, but the number of absolute monarchies is relatively small.

And Republics don't?

Then you haven't been paying attention to what's going on around you in the U.S right now. Or in any number of western democracies.

Not that reaches these kinds of levels...

[Salus Maior]

And Republics don't?

Then you haven't been paying attention to what's going on around you in the U.S right now. Or in any number of western democracies.

Not that reaches these kinds of levels...

That's pretty mild, to be honest.

And besides, corruption purges are also not something that Republics or the West is unfamiliar with. And given the U.S's current political situation, I imagine there's going to be a number of corruption arrests in the not so far future, trumped up (pun not intended) or otherwise.

[Seraven]

Republics don't exactly have a stellar history with that sort of thing either.

Impeachment isn't that hard if there's an actual reason for it.

Looking at what Democrats trying to do to Trump...

[Bienenhalde]

Doesn't make the slightest bit of sense.

Communist Monarchy?
Central planning under the king.

Sounds like a good idea to me.

[Kubra]

They're not shanking each other GoT style.

you say this like that's a good thing

[Victores]

Doesn't make the slightest bit of sense.

Communist Monarchy?
Central planning under the king.

This is an actual thing, the Hittite, Egyptian, Assyrian, and Mycenean civilizations are all centrally planned economies.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Starting to warm up to Mohammad bin Salman. His reform efforts seem sincere while maintaining tradition, and he seems to be a Pan-Arab politically.