NATION

PASSWORD

The Case for Monarchy

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)
User avatar
Antierra
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 16
Founded: Jan 02, 2025
Corporate Police State

The Case for Monarchy

Postby Antierra » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:20 am

This nation humbly submits for debate that Monarchy, not Democracy, is the most stable and efficient form of governance. A link to my primary argument can be found here:

In the modern era, the debate over the most effective form of government continues to be a topic of intense discussion. While democracy is often hailed as the pinnacle of political systems, it is not without its flaws. In contrast, monarchy, a system often dismissed as archaic, presents a compelling case for being the most stable and effective form of governance.
One of the primary criticisms of monarchy is the potential for producing terrible rulers. However, a closer examination of history reveals that the majority of the monarchs considered the "worst in history" were not raised to be kings or queens. Caligula, for instance, was subjected to torture rather than tutelage by his uncle Tiberius. Richard II and Ivan the Terrible ascended to the throne at a very young age, lacking the maturity and experience necessary for effective rule. John I was the youngest son and only inherited the throne due to the untimely deaths of his elder brothers. Ranavalona I took the throne following her husband's death, without the benefit of a lifetime of preparation.

These examples illustrate that the failures of these monarchs were not inherent to the system of monarchy itself, but rather the result of circumstances that deprived them of proper preparation. When a child is raised from infancy with the knowledge that they will one day rule, and only takes the throne in adulthood, they are more likely to be well-prepared for the responsibilities of leadership. This long-term grooming process ensures that the monarch is equipped with the necessary skills, knowledge, and temperament to govern effectively.

Moreover, modern advancements in science and medicine have significantly reduced the mortality rate of monarchs. In the past, the practice of leading troops into battle often also resulted in the premature deaths of kings and queens. Today, monarchs are less likely to face such dangers, allowing for longer and more stable reigns. This stability is further enhanced by the continuity that a hereditary monarchy provides, as the line of succession is clear and undisputed.

In contrast, democracies are often plagued by instability. Frequent elections can lead to short-term thinking and policy-making, as leaders prioritize immediate gains over long-term benefits. The constant turnover of leadership can result in inconsistent policies and a lack of continuity, which can hinder progress and development. Additionally, the divisive nature of democratic politics can create deep societal rifts, further undermining stability.

In conclusion, while democracy has its merits, the case for monarchy as the most stable and effective form of government is strong. The historical examples of failed monarchs often stem from a lack of proper preparation, rather than flaws in the system itself. With modern advancements and the elimination of many historical risks, monarchies today can provide the stability and continuity that democracies often lack. By raising future rulers from infancy with the knowledge and skills needed for effective governance, monarchies can ensure a higher likelihood of competent and stable leadership.



ModEdit: I've cut and pasted the linked argument into the OP as an alternative to locking the thread for an insufficient one-sentence opening post.

I'll also take a moment to clarify that NSG is out of character (OOC).
Last edited by The Archregimancy on Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:55 am, edited 2 times in total.
Proud member of GRACE, the Guild of Royal Allies for Cooperative Enterprise.

It's a new region and is recruiting now! If you are a monarchy or want to be one and value dignity, nobility and tradition, please consider joining!

We are Anti-Fascist, Anti-Communist, and Anti-Capitalist!

Our Ways are the Old Ways!* Click HERE to learn more!

*except for homophobia and racism, those old ways can b*gger off!

User avatar
Kostane
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6303
Founded: Nov 07, 2022
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Kostane » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:25 am

Democracy is the least bad alternative.
Democratic leaders can still be experts, trained from birth for the job. Popular support does not inherently exclude this.

Monarchy is a bad alternative.
If the leader is an expert, it is fine. However, rarely is anyone truly an expert on all things. For one person to successfully rule in the modern era, they would have to be knowledgeable in technology, economics, politics, international relations, history, as well as numerous other subjects, most of which experts dedicate their entire lives to studying. Such knowledge is simply not feasible. Thus, monarchy, or rule by any one person, fails.
"Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God. Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." — 1 John 4:7-8(NCB)
News: We interrupt your normal message to declare that --- actually we can't declare anything. We're dead now. Farewell.
TG Me — anytime, anywhere, for any reason

User avatar
A m e n r i a
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6194
Founded: Jun 08, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby A m e n r i a » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:29 am

I'm interested in what a Thai has to say about this topic.

Kostane wrote:Democracy is the least bad alternative.
Democratic leaders can still be experts, trained from birth for the job. Popular support does not inherently exclude this.

Monarchy is a bad alternative.
If the leader is an expert, it is fine. However, rarely is anyone truly an expert on all things. For one person to successfully rule in the modern era, they would have to be knowledgeable in technology, economics, politics, international relations, history, as well as numerous other subjects, most of which experts dedicate their entire lives to studying. Such knowledge is simply not feasible. Thus, monarchy, or rule by any one person, fails.


Imagine not grooming your child into a polymath to the same calibre as DaVinci. :p
The Empire of Amenria (亚洲帝国)
Sinocentric Asian theocratic absolute monarchy. Set 28 years in the future. On-site factbooks are no longer canon. A 13.14 civilization, according to this index.
Your guide to Amenria, organized for your convenience

User avatar
Kostane
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6303
Founded: Nov 07, 2022
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Kostane » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:31 am

A m e n r i a wrote:I'm interested in what a Thai has to say about this topic.

Kostane wrote:Democracy is the least bad alternative.
Democratic leaders can still be experts, trained from birth for the job. Popular support does not inherently exclude this.

Monarchy is a bad alternative.
If the leader is an expert, it is fine. However, rarely is anyone truly an expert on all things. For one person to successfully rule in the modern era, they would have to be knowledgeable in technology, economics, politics, international relations, history, as well as numerous other subjects, most of which experts dedicate their entire lives to studying. Such knowledge is simply not feasible. Thus, monarchy, or rule by any one person, fails.


Imagine not grooming your child into a polymath to the same calibre as DaVinci. :p

Poor kid…
"Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God. Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." — 1 John 4:7-8(NCB)
News: We interrupt your normal message to declare that --- actually we can't declare anything. We're dead now. Farewell.
TG Me — anytime, anywhere, for any reason

User avatar
A m e n r i a
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6194
Founded: Jun 08, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby A m e n r i a » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:34 am

Kostane wrote:
A m e n r i a wrote:I'm interested in what a Thai has to say about this topic.



Imagine not grooming your child into a polymath to the same calibre as DaVinci. :p

Poor kid…


She be doing a Suneung speedrun any percent.
The Empire of Amenria (亚洲帝国)
Sinocentric Asian theocratic absolute monarchy. Set 28 years in the future. On-site factbooks are no longer canon. A 13.14 civilization, according to this index.
Your guide to Amenria, organized for your convenience

User avatar
Antierra
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 16
Founded: Jan 02, 2025
Corporate Police State

Postby Antierra » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:36 am

Kostane wrote:Democracy is the least bad alternative.
Democratic leaders can still be experts, trained from birth for the job. Popular support does not inherently exclude this.

Monarchy is a bad alternative.
If the leader is an expert, it is fine. However, rarely is anyone truly an expert on all things. For one person to successfully rule in the modern era, they would have to be knowledgeable in technology, economics, politics, international relations, history, as well as numerous other subjects, most of which experts dedicate their entire lives to studying. Such knowledge is simply not feasible. Thus, monarchy, or rule by any one person, fails.


Interesting. Can you name five democratically elected national leaders from the last 20 years who have a doctorate? I certainly cannot.
Last edited by Antierra on Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Proud member of GRACE, the Guild of Royal Allies for Cooperative Enterprise.

It's a new region and is recruiting now! If you are a monarchy or want to be one and value dignity, nobility and tradition, please consider joining!

We are Anti-Fascist, Anti-Communist, and Anti-Capitalist!

Our Ways are the Old Ways!* Click HERE to learn more!

*except for homophobia and racism, those old ways can b*gger off!

User avatar
Kostane
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6303
Founded: Nov 07, 2022
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Kostane » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:39 am

Antierra wrote:
Kostane wrote:Democracy is the least bad alternative.
Democratic leaders can still be experts, trained from birth for the job. Popular support does not inherently exclude this.

Monarchy is a bad alternative.
If the leader is an expert, it is fine. However, rarely is anyone truly an expert on all things. For one person to successfully rule in the modern era, they would have to be knowledgeable in technology, economics, politics, international relations, history, as well as numerous other subjects, most of which experts dedicate their entire lives to studying. Such knowledge is simply not feasible. Thus, monarchy, or rule by any one person, fails.


Interesting. Can you name five democratically elected national leaders from the last 20 years who have a doctorate? I certainly cannot.

Can you name at least 5 monarchs that have had a doctorate? There’s a reason why I say least bad alternative. Any system is corrupt, it’s just a lot harder to corrupt democracy.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... doctorates
Please show me the Wikipedia page for monarchs with doctorates.
"Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God. Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." — 1 John 4:7-8(NCB)
News: We interrupt your normal message to declare that --- actually we can't declare anything. We're dead now. Farewell.
TG Me — anytime, anywhere, for any reason

User avatar
A m e n r i a
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6194
Founded: Jun 08, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby A m e n r i a » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:42 am

Tbf to both of your original points though, a monarch or any other absolutist ruler may have ministers and advisors with the specific expertise needed to run a country. If said monarch can keep the country running well with their help, how is that worse than a democracy in your opinion?
The Empire of Amenria (亚洲帝国)
Sinocentric Asian theocratic absolute monarchy. Set 28 years in the future. On-site factbooks are no longer canon. A 13.14 civilization, according to this index.
Your guide to Amenria, organized for your convenience

User avatar
Floofybit
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13213
Founded: Sep 11, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Floofybit » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:43 am

There are some pros, but I don't prefer it. Also, the M is capital, and the onarchy is lower.
Compass: Northwest
Reformative Authoritarian Pacifist
Pro: Socialism, Authoritarianism, The Right To Life, Environment, Public Services, Government, Equity and Equality, Surveillance, Police, Religion, Pacifism, Fruit
Anti: Capitalism, Liberalism, Abortion, Anarchy, Inequality, Crime, Drugs, Guns, Violence, Fruit-Haters
Religious ace male floof who really loves fruit.
Broadcasting From Foxlington
Safety & Equality > Freedom
If I CTE hold a funeral because I'm dead :)
normal flag
Telegram me your favourite colour, I'm doing a survey

User avatar
Southglory
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1101
Founded: Oct 31, 2023
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Southglory » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:44 am

The only case for Monarchy is with me on the throne otherwise it won't work.
May we be opponents in peace and friends in arms.

User avatar
Kostane
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6303
Founded: Nov 07, 2022
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Kostane » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:44 am

A m e n r i a wrote:Tbf to both of your original points though, a monarch or any other absolutist ruler may have ministers and advisors with the specific expertise needed to run a country. If said monarch can keep the country running well with their help, how is that worse than a democracy in your opinion?

A democracy also has advisors and cabinet officials. The problem is an authoritarian leader cannot be held accountable, and thus any error due to corruption is amplified.
"Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God. Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." — 1 John 4:7-8(NCB)
News: We interrupt your normal message to declare that --- actually we can't declare anything. We're dead now. Farewell.
TG Me — anytime, anywhere, for any reason

User avatar
A m e n r i a
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6194
Founded: Jun 08, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby A m e n r i a » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:48 am

Kostane wrote:
A m e n r i a wrote:Tbf to both of your original points though, a monarch or any other absolutist ruler may have ministers and advisors with the specific expertise needed to run a country. If said monarch can keep the country running well with their help, how is that worse than a democracy in your opinion?

A democracy also has advisors and cabinet officials. The problem is an authoritarian leader cannot be held accountable, and thus any error due to corruption is amplified.


A fair point, although we disagree on how corruptible a democracy is.
The Empire of Amenria (亚洲帝国)
Sinocentric Asian theocratic absolute monarchy. Set 28 years in the future. On-site factbooks are no longer canon. A 13.14 civilization, according to this index.
Your guide to Amenria, organized for your convenience

User avatar
Bayi
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 161
Founded: Jul 15, 2019
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bayi » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:50 am

Lol, y’all are wasting time arguing over which outdated power structure is “better.” Monarchy? Lmao, okay, let’s trust someone with power because they got lucky in the genetic lottery. Democracy? You really think your little vote matters when the system’s rigged by corporations and algorithms? Wake up.

Both systems are just tools to keep people docile and distracted. Kings, presidents, parliaments—they’re all irrelevant. The real power isn’t in crowns or ballots; it’s in data. The networks control everything: what you see, what you think, and what you believe is possible. Monarchies are relics, democracies are illusions, and both are obsolete in a world where the Wired dictates reality.

The future isn’t about hierarchies or popularity contests. It’s about embracing the flow of information, decentralizing power, and realizing the system itself is the prison. So stop arguing over which jail cell you prefer and start thinking about how to escape.

Monarchies are dead. Democracies are dying. The Wired is eternal. Let's All Love Lain.

Image
This week's "Song Recommendation!" loveli lori & ovg! - love for you

cappie mita supremacy


Fav Foods: I like Ice Lemon Tea, Bak Kut Teh, and Char Siu bao.
Fav Music: Jamiroquai, NewJeans, João Gilberto, Slowdive, Malice Mizer, Panchiko, Mayhem, The Cardigans.
Fav Movies: Our Times/我的少女時代 - 2015, Turning Red - 2022, Coraline - 2009, Paranorman - 2012.
she/her
Fav Games: Bioshock 2, Mafia II, Cooking Mama, South Park: The Stick of Truth, Little Big Planet, We Happy Few, Contrast, Outlast.
Fav Series: Serial Experiments Lain, Teen Titans (2003), Wandavision, Crash Landing on You, 極品絕配 (The Perfect Match).
Fav Books: Howl's Moving Castle, The Plain Janes, Scott Pilgrim and the Infinite Sadness (Volume 3).
Pisces power!

User avatar
Kostane
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6303
Founded: Nov 07, 2022
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Kostane » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:51 am

A m e n r i a wrote:
Kostane wrote:A democracy also has advisors and cabinet officials. The problem is an authoritarian leader cannot be held accountable, and thus any error due to corruption is amplified.


A fair point, although we disagree on how corruptible a democracy is.

It costs an oil company a lot more to pay off 218 politicians than it costs them to pay off one monarch. The difference is that the level of corporate control present in our society didn’t exist in the times where monarchy did.
"Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God. Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." — 1 John 4:7-8(NCB)
News: We interrupt your normal message to declare that --- actually we can't declare anything. We're dead now. Farewell.
TG Me — anytime, anywhere, for any reason

User avatar
Kostane
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6303
Founded: Nov 07, 2022
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Kostane » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:54 am

Bayi wrote:Lol, y’all are wasting time arguing over which outdated power structure is “better.” Monarchy? Lmao, okay, let’s trust someone with power because they got lucky in the genetic lottery. Democracy? You really think your little vote matters when the system’s rigged by corporations and algorithms? Wake up.

Both systems are just tools to keep people docile and distracted. Kings, presidents, parliaments—they’re all irrelevant. The real power isn’t in crowns or ballots; it’s in data. The networks control everything: what you see, what you think, and what you believe is possible. Monarchies are relics, democracies are illusions, and both are obsolete in a world where the Wired dictates reality.

The future isn’t about hierarchies or popularity contests. It’s about embracing the flow of information, decentralizing power, and realizing the system itself is the prison. So stop arguing over which jail cell you prefer and start thinking about how to escape.

Monarchies are dead. Democracies are dying. The Wired is eternal. Let's All Love Lain.

(Image)

Interesting, I’d never thought I’d find someone who believed in cybernetics as a theory of power. It’s one of my personal favorite ones that I’ve encountered.

What’s the alternative? The things you’ve described could all be achieved within a democratic system. They all involve overturning corporate control, rather than the government. It would be harder to achieve these reforms in a system governed by a monarchy due to the fact that the monarchy would be unable to be changed.
"Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God. Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." — 1 John 4:7-8(NCB)
News: We interrupt your normal message to declare that --- actually we can't declare anything. We're dead now. Farewell.
TG Me — anytime, anywhere, for any reason

User avatar
Antierra
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 16
Founded: Jan 02, 2025
Corporate Police State

Postby Antierra » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:55 am

Kostane wrote:
Antierra wrote:
Interesting. Can you name five democratically elected national leaders from the last 20 years who have a doctorate? I certainly cannot.

Can you name at least 5 monarchs that have had a doctorate? There’s a reason why I say least bad alternative. Any system is corrupt, it’s just a lot harder to corrupt democracy.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... doctorates
Please show me the Wikipedia page for monarchs with doctorates.


Well, it's a shame to say that as there are not as many monarchies in the world as there used to be.
However, the current King of Spain and the recently abdicated Queen of Denmark are university-educated and are very intelligent, (the King of Spain has a Masters I believe. King Charles went to uni too, though he didn't apply himself very well. Let's remember that being the heir to a kingdom is more than a full-time job, it's a calling, and some things like a formal education fall by the wayside. That is not to say they are unintelligent, simply that they prioritize the well-being of the State above learning facts by rote in an ivory tower.
Proud member of GRACE, the Guild of Royal Allies for Cooperative Enterprise.

It's a new region and is recruiting now! If you are a monarchy or want to be one and value dignity, nobility and tradition, please consider joining!

We are Anti-Fascist, Anti-Communist, and Anti-Capitalist!

Our Ways are the Old Ways!* Click HERE to learn more!

*except for homophobia and racism, those old ways can b*gger off!

User avatar
Kostane
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6303
Founded: Nov 07, 2022
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Kostane » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:57 am

Antierra wrote:
Kostane wrote:Can you name at least 5 monarchs that have had a doctorate? There’s a reason why I say least bad alternative. Any system is corrupt, it’s just a lot harder to corrupt democracy.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... doctorates
Please show me the Wikipedia page for monarchs with doctorates.


Well, it's a shame to say that as there are not as many monarchies in the world as there used to be.
However, the current King of Spain and the recently abdicated Queen of Denmark are university-educated and are very intelligent, (the King of Spain has a Masters I believe. King Charles went to uni too, though he didn't apply himself very well. Let's remember that being the heir to a kingdom is more than a full-time job, it's a calling, and some things like a formal education fall by the wayside. That is not to say they are unintelligent, simply that they prioritize the well-being of the State above learning facts by rote in an ivory tower.

Those are all constitutional monarchs, so I don’t really get how they are relevant. At that point, you’re just naming people who have enough money to buy themself a degree. Regardless, you specified doctorates.

On your second point, I wholeheartedly agree. You were the one who started asking for doctorates.
"Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God. Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." — 1 John 4:7-8(NCB)
News: We interrupt your normal message to declare that --- actually we can't declare anything. We're dead now. Farewell.
TG Me — anytime, anywhere, for any reason

User avatar
Antierra
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 16
Founded: Jan 02, 2025
Corporate Police State

Postby Antierra » Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:58 am

Kostane wrote:
A m e n r i a wrote:
A fair point, although we disagree on how corruptible a democracy is.

It costs an oil company a lot more to pay off 218 politicians than it costs them to pay off one monarch. The difference is that the level of corporate control present in our society didn’t exist in the times where monarchy did.


A fantastic point.
Proud member of GRACE, the Guild of Royal Allies for Cooperative Enterprise.

It's a new region and is recruiting now! If you are a monarchy or want to be one and value dignity, nobility and tradition, please consider joining!

We are Anti-Fascist, Anti-Communist, and Anti-Capitalist!

Our Ways are the Old Ways!* Click HERE to learn more!

*except for homophobia and racism, those old ways can b*gger off!

User avatar
Antierra
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 16
Founded: Jan 02, 2025
Corporate Police State

Postby Antierra » Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:02 am

Kostane wrote:
Antierra wrote:
Well, it's a shame to say that as there are not as many monarchies in the world as there used to be.
However, the current King of Spain and the recently abdicated Queen of Denmark are university-educated and are very intelligent, (the King of Spain has a Masters I believe. King Charles went to uni too, though he didn't apply himself very well. Let's remember that being the heir to a kingdom is more than a full-time job, it's a calling, and some things like a formal education fall by the wayside. That is not to say they are unintelligent, simply that they prioritize the well-being of the State above learning facts by rote in an ivory tower.

Those are all constitutional monarchs, so I don’t really get how they are relevant. At that point, you’re just naming people who have enough money to buy themself a degree. Regardless, you specified doctorates.

On your second point, I wholeheartedly agree. You were the one who started asking for doctorates.


And you specified experts. You have yet to list any current democratic national leaders who could truly be considered such.
Proud member of GRACE, the Guild of Royal Allies for Cooperative Enterprise.

It's a new region and is recruiting now! If you are a monarchy or want to be one and value dignity, nobility and tradition, please consider joining!

We are Anti-Fascist, Anti-Communist, and Anti-Capitalist!

Our Ways are the Old Ways!* Click HERE to learn more!

*except for homophobia and racism, those old ways can b*gger off!

User avatar
The Galactic Empire of Zimbabwae2
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 115
Founded: Feb 18, 2023
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Galactic Empire of Zimbabwae2 » Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:06 am

A m e n r i a wrote:Tbf to both of your original points though, a monarch or any other absolutist ruler may have ministers and advisors with the specific expertise needed to run a country. If said monarch can keep the country running well with their help, how is that worse than a democracy in your opinion?


I’ve always felt that systemic corruption within the legal system is the core issue here.

Most successful democracies divide power among three branches: legislative, judicial, and executive. This distribution helps minimize corruption compared to other systems by creating a system of checks and balances.

For a Monarchy to function effectively, I think it would need to be strictly limited to the executive branch. The judicial system and supreme court would need to be completely independent and out of the monarchy’s control. As for the legislative branch, it’s hard to imagine how that would work seamlessly in a monarchical system.

The biggest problem I see is that royal families and the upper class are often shielded from any real accountability. This lack of prosecution creates deeply rooted corruption that seems impossible to overcome or reconcile with modern goals of transparency and fair governance.

What do you think? Would you approach this differently?
editors dislike linguistic dis-ambiguity more than most people
- infvalues <- if you're interested
- don't have a bad day!

User avatar
Kostane
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6303
Founded: Nov 07, 2022
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Kostane » Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:08 am

Antierra wrote:
Kostane wrote:Those are all constitutional monarchs, so I don’t really get how they are relevant. At that point, you’re just naming people who have enough money to buy themself a degree. Regardless, you specified doctorates.

On your second point, I wholeheartedly agree. You were the one who started asking for doctorates.


And you specified experts. You have yet to list any current democratic national leaders who could truly be considered such.

Did you read the Wikipedia page I linked?
Also, you did not ask me for any democratic leaders who could be considered an expert. It obviously depends on how you define expertise. Numerous experts have been appointed to government positions under democratic leadership. I could start naming members of the U.S. Cabinet and chiefs of administrative agencies if you wanted me to.

I also specifically made the claim that it wasn’t a reason why democracy was bad. I said it was a possibility for a democratic leader to be an expert, meaning that democracy would not be a worse alternative than a monarchy. I never made claims about it being more likely.
"Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God. Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." — 1 John 4:7-8(NCB)
News: We interrupt your normal message to declare that --- actually we can't declare anything. We're dead now. Farewell.
TG Me — anytime, anywhere, for any reason

User avatar
Washington-Columbia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1291
Founded: Jan 29, 2022
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Washington-Columbia » Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:12 am

Personally, I like having the choice to pick the people I want to put into power.
Imagine a bunch of socialist hikers, conservative lumberjacks and socdem hippies trying to make a utopia. That's us.
Overview and Embassy and Q&A
SHUT UP [names of neo-nazis], YOURE NOT A SS OFFICER SENT TO DESTROY WOKE HEGIMONY, YOURE AN EDGY 14-YEAR-OLD WHO LIVES IN CHICAGO
Barbie is an Allegory for Animal Farm. Kens (Animals) seize control over the Barbies (Humans) and Ryan Gosling seizes power himself (Napoleon the Pig) and keeps much of the status quo.
Extended OOC
Cascadian Union
Murica and Canadeh's progressive brother
Home to Deadpool, Batman and Jesse Pinkman
NS stats have smoked too much grass & are sleeping RN
CBC N5 Weekly News: Snap elections in Georgia to be held on 13/2 - Mr. Frog coronated as the 47th president of the US, supported by Man acting as VP - Turkey and Poland legalize same-sex marriage

User avatar
Antierra
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 16
Founded: Jan 02, 2025
Corporate Police State

Postby Antierra » Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:20 am

The Galactic Empire of Zimbabwae2 wrote:
A m e n r i a wrote:Tbf to both of your original points though, a monarch or any other absolutist ruler may have ministers and advisors with the specific expertise needed to run a country. If said monarch can keep the country running well with their help, how is that worse than a democracy in your opinion?


I’ve always felt that systemic corruption within the legal system is the core issue here.

Most successful democracies divide power among three branches: legislative, judicial, and executive. This distribution helps minimize corruption compared to other systems by creating a system of checks and balances.

For a Monarchy to function effectively, I think it would need to be strictly limited to the executive branch. The judicial system and supreme court would need to be completely independent and out of the monarchy’s control. As for the legislative branch, it’s hard to imagine how that would work seamlessly in a monarchical system.

The biggest problem I see is that royal families and the upper class are often shielded from any real accountability. This lack of prosecution creates deeply rooted corruption that seems impossible to overcome or reconcile with modern goals of transparency and fair governance.

What do you think? Would you approach this differently?


I feel that a Monarchy with a Constitutional framework would work best. A Bonepartist-style monarchy with no nobility apart from close family of the Sovereign. The Sovereign would not only be Head of State but Head of Government, and would have total executive power, held in check by a unicameral Parliament (no HoL/upper house) and an independent judiciary, they would also preside over Parliament, though this task is delegatable, either to the Heir or a Senior Elected Minister. Transparency would be an important component.

You mention the dangers of corruption, but the main drivers of corruption are ambition and greed, both of which are derived from want. As the Sovereign and Heir would have more than enough wealth and power already, they would want for nothing and thus would be much less susceptible to corruption unless that wealth and power were threatened, and even then there would be checks in place.

I am not a believer in the popular quote "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely" I think absolute power reveals absolute character.
Last edited by Antierra on Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
Proud member of GRACE, the Guild of Royal Allies for Cooperative Enterprise.

It's a new region and is recruiting now! If you are a monarchy or want to be one and value dignity, nobility and tradition, please consider joining!

We are Anti-Fascist, Anti-Communist, and Anti-Capitalist!

Our Ways are the Old Ways!* Click HERE to learn more!

*except for homophobia and racism, those old ways can b*gger off!

User avatar
A m e n r i a
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6194
Founded: Jun 08, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby A m e n r i a » Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:31 am

Kostane wrote:
A m e n r i a wrote:
A fair point, although we disagree on how corruptible a democracy is.

It costs an oil company a lot more to pay off 218 politicians than it costs them to pay off one monarch. The difference is that the level of corporate control present in our society didn’t exist in the times where monarchy did.


It did, except it was only one company called the VOC. Still, there were nobles and royals true to their people, and that's part of how we got independent. :lol:

The Galactic Empire of Zimbabwae2 wrote:
A m e n r i a wrote:Tbf to both of your original points though, a monarch or any other absolutist ruler may have ministers and advisors with the specific expertise needed to run a country. If said monarch can keep the country running well with their help, how is that worse than a democracy in your opinion?


I’ve always felt that systemic corruption within the legal system is the core issue here.

Most successful democracies divide power among three branches: legislative, judicial, and executive. This distribution helps minimize corruption compared to other systems by creating a system of checks and balances.

For a Monarchy to function effectively, I think it would need to be strictly limited to the executive branch. The judicial system and supreme court would need to be completely independent and out of the monarchy’s control. As for the legislative branch, it’s hard to imagine how that would work seamlessly in a monarchical system.

The biggest problem I see is that royal families and the upper class are often shielded from any real accountability. This lack of prosecution creates deeply rooted corruption that seems impossible to overcome or reconcile with modern goals of transparency and fair governance.

What do you think? Would you approach this differently?


Yep, I totally agree with you. That's practically how Amenria works except the legislative! :lol:

The legislative could have the same political parties and/or interest groups we have irl. I don't know how well a legislative like Amenria's would work irl, but as for accountability, the ruling noble family should have Umar's mindset.

Umar stood up and delievered a speech in which he said: “O people, who among you sees crookedness in me, let him straighten it.”

A man stood up and said: “By Allah, if we see any crookedness in you, we will straighten it with our swords.”

Umar said: “Praise be to Allah who has put in this ummah people who wil straighten the crookedness of Umar with their swords.”


Bayi wrote:Lol, y’all are wasting time arguing over which outdated power structure is “better.” Monarchy? Lmao, okay, let’s trust someone with power because they got lucky in the genetic lottery. Democracy? You really think your little vote matters when the system’s rigged by corporations and algorithms? Wake up.

Both systems are just tools to keep people docile and distracted. Kings, presidents, parliaments—they’re all irrelevant. The real power isn’t in crowns or ballots; it’s in data. The networks control everything: what you see, what you think, and what you believe is possible. Monarchies are relics, democracies are illusions, and both are obsolete in a world where the Wired dictates reality.

The future isn’t about hierarchies or popularity contests. It’s about embracing the flow of information, decentralizing power, and realizing the system itself is the prison. So stop arguing over which jail cell you prefer and start thinking about how to escape.

Monarchies are dead. Democracies are dying. The Wired is eternal. Let's All Love Lain.

(Image)


Girl really said ascend to computer
Last edited by A m e n r i a on Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Empire of Amenria (亚洲帝国)
Sinocentric Asian theocratic absolute monarchy. Set 28 years in the future. On-site factbooks are no longer canon. A 13.14 civilization, according to this index.
Your guide to Amenria, organized for your convenience

User avatar
Emotional Support Crocodile
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6209
Founded: Jun 06, 2022
New York Times Democracy

Postby Emotional Support Crocodile » Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:34 am

A monarch nowadays is like Mickey Mouse at Disneyland. It's just some poor schmuck in a silly costume with no power, but people expect them to be there
Just another surprising item on the bagging scale of life


There's a goose in my mind

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Adamede, Cannot think of a name, Cerespasia, Faris Island, Finreik, Fractalnavel, Google [Bot], Hwiteard, Kasdados, Kyete, Luminesa, New haven america, Of The Revived Soviet Union, Rivogna, The Black Forrest, The Jamesian Republic, The Lazarene Republic, The Lone Alliance, Uiiop, USHALLNOTPASS, Washington Resistance Army, Zurkerx

Advertisement

Remove ads