Monarchies vs. Republics

[SD_Film Artists]

As Brit I am an ardent supporter of a Republic. I think Monarchies are an outdated feudal system that belong in the trash heap of history. The whole idea of a hereditary divine right is purely ridiculous and it helps create a reactionary culture as well as a huge cult of personality around the royal family. There is also the huge issue of the wealth divide, as a leftist the wealth gap disgusts me; that every royal baby will grow up with a sliver spoon in their mouth, living a life of luxury while are there 4.1 million children living in abstract poverty. If it was up to me I would have the royal family abolished with its wealth and land distributed to the public, and have Britain become a semi-presidential system like France.

Constitutional monarchies are a relatively new system, and abolishing the monarchy will have no effect on real inequality issues such as the housing market; so you're basically throwing away a pillar of our national identity to save a few quid.

[Russkiya Svyachena]

Oh, and I forgot to mention: Most of the unironic monarchists in Russia are delusional absolutists who think we can give power over our massive country to one guy who's probably not ready for it, so no thanks.

Да, у нас так. "Заставь дурака богу молиться, он лоб расшибет". Впрочем, это даже лучше: на этих крайностях абсолютизма рельефнее видны недостатки монархии как таковой, как принципа.

Yes, we do. "Make a fool pray to God, he will break his forehead." However, this is even better: at these extremes of absolutism, the flaws of the monarchy as such, as a principle, are more clearly visible.

Oh, and Technoscience, день добрый!

День добрый!

Hello!

У нас есть Русский сайт

I don’t think Russia needs a Romanov restoration at all, we’re doing great as a presidential republic, and pre revolutionary Russia was a primitive society with very backwards social customs, going back to such a system is out of the question for me

[-Ocelot-]

I support monarchy because democracy and republicanism have shown themselves as often easily corrupted and subject to outward influence.

Republics are corrupted by flaws. Monarchies are corrupted by design.

[Pacomia]

When did monarchy ever do good for a country?

[The South Falls]

I support monarchy because democracy and republicanism have shown themselves as often easily corrupted and subject to outward influence.

Republics are corrupted by flaws. Monarchies are corrupted by design.

Democracies can only be fully corrupted when multiple instruments of power bear corruption. Monarchies are much more subject to corruption, due to the power being concentrated within one autocratic ruler.

[Forsher]

I see we've reached the point of the thread where people start casually throwing monarchy around as a synonym for "hereditary autocrat who can actually utilise their de jure powers".

That you wish it were so does not make your points any less straw men.

[Free Arabian Nation]

Define "Monarchism" and "Republicanism"

Constitutional Monarchism, like the UK, is perfectly fine in my book along with Republicanism. My problem with Monarchism comes from the absolutists. Absolute dynasties always end in corruption and bloodshed, It allows foreigners to rule countries because "Muh legitimacy" from Royal Marriages (The current Royal Family of the UK is a Hun), it encourages positions of power based on hereditary rather than merit, etc.

The Republic system quite obviously isn't the best, but it is certainly a step above being born with a silver spoon and millions under your potential rule.

[Salus Maior]

When did monarchy ever do good for a country?

For about a few thousand years of civilization before republicanism/democracy became a thing.

[Salus Maior]

Aren't you Catalan?

Nope, Granadan.

But you live in Catalonia, right?

Or am I thinking of someone else?

[Prusenreich]

So is Lichtenstein the only European monarchy where the monarch has any power

[Kowani]

Nope, Granadan.

But you live in Catalonia, right?

Or am I thinking of someone else?

I did. I moved.

[Pacomia]

When did monarchy ever do good for a country?

For about a few thousand years of civilization before republicanism/democracy became a thing.

Not really.

[Aureumterra]

For my country, well, Iceland is one of the few European countries where republic is an integral part of the culture, ffs we have the oldest republican institute in history.

[Teachian]

In all honesty, my preferred government structure is a Parliamentary republic with a ceremonial president, which on a basic level isn’t too far off from a crowned republic. A lot of royal families have really interesting histories, and ones that have survived to modern day in a democratic society have done so by learning how to evolve and just generally being popular people (Norway’s family comes to mind), which makes them even more fascinating. As a cultural and historical symbol, they’re cool.

So the average constitutional monarchy’s pretty neat, but I think the trend remains skewed towards Republics. Most monarchies are rooted in a time when said trend was reversed, but also in a history of decisions to win over support for their continued existence. Without the pressure to adopt a monarchy, nor a real guarantee that any chosen royal family would be objectively better than an elected executive (which included all future heirs), it’s pretty apparent that the ball’s in the crown’s court to justify themselves rather than the other way around.

[Salus Maior]

For about a few thousand years of civilization before republicanism/democracy became a thing.

Not really.

Yes, really.

The vast majority of existing states were monarchies for pretty much all of history up until the modern era, and technology, philosophy, society all progressed under monarchies. It was and is a functional means of governing with a great deal of successful precedent.

[The Galactic Liberal Democracy]

Coming from a Spaniard:

Monarchy is a sham.
Democracy is occasionally a sham, but not inherently so.

Best serious NS quote of 2020.

Monarchies are pointless and harmful while democracy usually works. The more representative republics are, the stronger. Monarchies are always terrible, but republics have potential to succeed.

[Teachian]

Not really.

Yes, really.

The vast majority of existing states were monarchies for pretty much all of history up until the modern era, and technology, philosophy, society all progressed under monarchies. It was and is a functional means of governing with a great deal of successful precedent.

Technically, by being the majority of all governments on this planet (though arguably varying wildly across time and their locations), monarchies would thus have overseen a majority of humanity’s successes and failures. Not to say they were especially responsible for the latter, I just don’t think they’re also vital for the former too.

That would also ignore how varied and complex governments were de facto and de jure from the local level up. Just because a monarchy was a monarchy did not mean they were constantly or even occasionally making sure their entire kingdom was purely that system, as long as those under them weren’t hindering their interests.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Politically, I'm an anarchist, and religiously a monarchist.

[Internationalist Bastard]

How do I put this? I love the freedom brought by democracy and the aesthetic of aristocracy.
I’d say my ideal world would be ruled by a democratically elected government but full of various nobles and a supreme emperor

[Internationalist Bastard]

Politically, I'm an anarchist, and religiously a monarchist.

That actually explains your views so perfectly I actually understand you better

[Kowani]

Coming from a Spaniard:

Best serious NS quote of 2020.

Monarchies are pointless and harmful while democracy usually works. The more representative republics are, the stronger. Monarchies are always terrible, but republics have potential to succeed.

Thank you!

Politically, I'm an anarchist, and religiously a monarchist.

How’s that work?

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

Politically, I'm an anarchist, and religiously a monarchist.

I'm not going to lie, you're the only sincere anarcho-monarchist I'm acquainted with; most that I've met only advocated it for meme purposes.

[Free Arabian Nation]

How do I put this? I love the freedom brought by democracy and the aesthetic of aristocracy.
I’d say my ideal world would be ruled by a democratically elected government but full of various nobles and a supreme emperor

You joking? The Commies have a much better (and much more comfy) aesthetics

[Internationalist Bastard]

How do I put this? I love the freedom brought by democracy and the aesthetic of aristocracy.
I’d say my ideal world would be ruled by a democratically elected government but full of various nobles and a supreme emperor

You joking? The Commies have a much better (and much more comfy) aesthetics

Nah, I love uniforms, I love titles, I love it all. The most fun communism gets is Stalin or Kim worship

[United Muscovite Nations]

Best serious NS quote of 2020.

Monarchies are pointless and harmful while democracy usually works. The more representative republics are, the stronger. Monarchies are always terrible, but republics have potential to succeed.

Thank you!

Politically, I'm an anarchist, and religiously a monarchist.

How’s that work?

I believe in the abolition of political control but also in the spontaneity of monarchy arising from the community of the faithful entrusting a monarch who is anointed by God.