First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply Monarchy, should we have a king?
2958 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / California
Offline
Posted 2/2/13
I like the idea of having a King, as long as that king is not polluted by a bunch of greedy savages.
20254 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Maryland
Offline
Posted 2/2/13 , edited 2/2/13



Well this debate can go on for sometime. Lets agree to disagree. Atleast we all can agree on one thing; that anime is awesome!
29425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 2/3/13 , edited 2/3/13

infamybrian wrote:

Well this debate can go on for sometime. Lets agree to disagree. Atleast we all can agree on one thing; that anime is awesome!


You shouldn't assume that he has any idea what anime even is.
4419 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / ICQ: 114629959
Offline
Posted 2/3/13
If you compare monarchy and democracy you have in a democracy at least the illusion of influence or power of the people.
In most western countries you can vote every some years to decide who for the next legislation will decided without the consent of the population whats going to happen. I call that system parliamentary dictatorship.

So it depends on you. Do you want the illusion of influence? Go for democracy. Otherwise monarchy.
9527 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Ontario, Canada
Offline
Posted 2/3/13

Winterfells wrote:

Monarchies are a terrible idea. For every smart, kind, and progressive king, there are 10 times the number of totalitarian, cruel, and greedy tyrants throughout history.

Think of a king's rule as...job performance. If someone was entitled to a job regardless of whether they are qualified, simply because they are blood-related to the previous job holder, more likely than not they won't care as much for their duties and probably won't be motivated to work hard at all. They know that it isn't an open competition, and that they have a monopoly on that position of power.

A system where a politician in charge of a certain duty, is elected by the people who would be influenced by the decisions of that political office, is much better. When someone knows that they are limited by term, and in order to remain in that office, they must perform at least somewhat competently or another person will take their place, they are much more likely to put forth actual effort.

At least the people who are in that political position WANT to be there. There have been kings throughout history who were only kings because it was their birth right, but had no interest in politics. They were interested in art, or history, or science, etc. so they just had a representative rule for them anyway.

Also, having one person with ultimate authority is unwise because they have to answer to no one. Whereas in a system there should be checks and balances, where one end can overrule the other. Also, when multiple people/parties/political entities all contribute to a decision, it represents more of the diverse views of the citizens, and also incorporates multiple points of view.


This guy understands

Muppe 
54430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Norway
Offline
Posted 2/3/13
No king, no queen.
Monarchy has no place in a democracy, If a lot of the taxes already go to the lazy ass politicians that we atleast get to elect to do something else then we elected them to do, then why should it also go to someone that doesn´t have to do anything? The king of sweden might be the best example here, more or less looks down on the common people while at the same time being the biggest wellfare taker in the country, from time to time he goes to some random country and say something retarded... like the time he praised how open a DICTATORSHIP was.
227 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / F
Offline
Posted 2/3/13
It brings tourism!
4419 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / ICQ: 114629959
Offline
Posted 2/3/13

KatyAlicia wrote:

It brings tourism!


Democracy or monarchy?
227 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / F
Offline
Posted 2/3/13
I suppose both!
4419 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / ICQ: 114629959
Offline
Posted 2/3/13

KatyAlicia wrote:

I suppose both!


If you continue this you have to think about the follwing as well: Is a king better than a queen? Or a young monarch better than an old?
64622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M
Offline
Posted 2/3/13

longfenglim wrote:



The point, is that they are so seperate from the people, they no longer have need to 'please the nation', but that, by their own expertise, are allowed to work for the better of the nation. This aloofness is precisely the strenght of a monarchy, that we should be ruled be someone beyond us is best, because it allows the sage rulers to govern unbeholden to Doxa, common opinion and prejudices.


You seem to thing that because a monarch/emperor isn't reliant on the public to re-elect them into officer that this means that they don't have incentives that are in conflict with doing what is best for the nation. This would be incorrect. There are many things that drive a monarch/emperor just as there are things that drive any human. There have been those that didn't care at all about ruling and lived lives of decadence, while their people suffered. There have those that were so egotistical that they felt the need to leave their mark on the world, whether through war or monuments, and gave little care to the people. There have been those that became fearful of others usurping the throne and/or paranoid of those around them, and committed brutal and vile acts because of it.



lordseth23 wrote:



I agree that my ideas may be too broad for a global society that is living on resources that are far too limited, but there is no reason not to believe that humanity will soon enough be living in a world of abundant resources through the incredible power of collaboration and technology. We should pursue this form of global education once the ideal conditions are met.


Let us pray that never happens. Global "education" under lordseth23's watch would be horrifying, indeed. Especially when you discover that regardless the "conditions" that someone is brought up in, different people will respond in different ways. It doesn't matter how "ideal" the conditions are, there will still be cretins, idiots, and madmen. This isn't solely because of genetics as longfenglim would likely posit, but because of various ways people would choose to respond to your education. Some might respond amiably, some might be resentful, and some might be bored and not pay attention. What would be done to those who don't lap up the "education" like the dogs you expect.
Banned
31571 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / The Void.
Offline
Posted 2/3/13
Don't worry people we will reach Heaven in a few months, but as long as you choose to create Heaven on Earth. I applaud you, lordseth23 for holding steadfast in your positives beliefs. Positivity/Love will show the way. Don't let the cretins like Lim get to you. He is just a small fearful man.
4497 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 2/3/13
Over here in America we barely are able to listen to our teachers, how are we gonna listen to some king. Actually even I wouldn't listen to them no matter what punishment they tried to give me.

That's probably one of the lessons I learned being born and raised in America. I hate people ordering me around (except a boss for a job, or a leader in some kind of group for a project). I don't mind small leaders like a boss for a job, but big leaders like a king not in this lifetime for me.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.