Was monarchism better?

File: charles-ii-of-spain_imagelarge.jpg (14KB, 448x312px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 448x312px

No.

>>2832835
>this kills the monarcuck

>>2832835
Not even constitutional monarchism?

>>2832835
That's an argument against incest and free sexuality.

>>2832853
dynastic politics requires a certain degree of incest

>>2832832
Why would it be better? With elections you can at least remove incompetent leaders after their term. With monarchies, constitutional or not, you're stuck for life. Also the basis for monarchies is arbitrary and based on faulty beliefs that they're descendants from a pure 'royal' bloodline.

>>2832832
For every Peter the Great, Emperor Meiji and Fredrick the Great there were plenty of Tsar Nicks and Kaiser Wilhelms.

>>2832877
Because they study their whole life about how to run their country.

>>2832879
Are you implying that it is any better with elective presidents/prime ministers? LMAO at this small baller cuck

>>2832882
Not really, they hardly have an incentive to prepare and study because they're entitled to it. An elected official has more incentive to be prepared and competent because he needs to be elected

>>2832883
Except monarchs are to rule from their succession to the throne and until death unless they are overthrown or forced to abdicate. A bad president in a democracy will get 4-5 years of service.

File: mcb-adrianopolis.jpg (89KB, 833x625px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 833x625px

Elective monarchy in small groups of people with a strong elite with good moral values (obligation of the defense of the weak, tyrannicide justified by society etc.)would be the best system in my opinion

File: Duplessis_-_Louis_XVI_of_France,_oval,_Versailles.jpg (420KB, 1391x1770px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 1391x1770px

>>2832832

YES

>>2832877
>dynastic politics requires a certain degree of incest
This isn't true.

>>2832850
might as well not have a monarch

>>2833071
This, just a glorified president (parlamentary democracy) for life, just hands over the mandates and signs what the parliament passes.

>>2832888
Not really. An elected official is merely incentivized to master the skills needed to get him elected. Which is not the same thing as what is needed to run a country well, although there is a little overlap. So a elected politician is going to be spending a lot of time figuring out how to project a persona, how to appear kind or noble I mean he basically just needs to learn how to put on a show. I'm not defending monarchy though, because the kings or queens often do the same thing. The best advantage of democracy in general that I can see is that the ruler only gets 5 or so years to rule before he must pass on which in theory minimizes any damage that could be caused by his rulership although that's little comfort when you see how the scum usually rises to the top.

>>2833090
>Not really. An elected official is merely incentivized to master the skills needed to get him elected. Which is not the same thing as what is needed to run a country well, although there is a little overlap. So a elected politician is going to be spending a lot of time figuring out how to project a persona, how to appear kind or noble I mean he basically just needs to learn how to put on a show.

Pretty much this. Just look at Greece, they elected a charismatic leader who told them they would stick it to the man and not go with the austerity, and Greece is going down, like it or not they need austerity in order to pay back the debt. Tell the people what they want to hear and you are gold, he is gonna be laughing from some island with all the money he made when Greece gets btfo by the banks.

>The best advantage of democracy in general that I can see is that the ruler only gets 5 or so years to rule before he must pass on which in theory minimizes any damage that could be caused by his rulership although that's little comfort when you see how the scum usually rises to the top.

Here in Macedonia we have had the same government for 11 years, it changed as of a few days ago but they did some crazy shit to keep in power, the pm stepped down only to be replaced by a puppet. Politicians will find a way around laws to keep in power. I do defend monarchy though.

>>2833128
>Pretty much this. Just look at Greece, they elected a charismatic leader who told them they would stick it to the man and not go with the austerity, and Greece is going down, like it or not they need austerity in order to pay back the debt. Tell the people what they want to hear and you are gold, he is gonna be laughing from some island with all the money he made when Greece gets btfo by the banks.
You forgot the part in which Tsipras went (and continues) full Austerity.

>>2833090

That's what happens when you have elections without meritocratic screening.

Election for high office does not require showing competence in a lower office, which makes it possible for incapable politicians to be elected.

The Roman Republic had something called the Cursus Honorum, which were a series of offices which candidates had to hold and be successful in to be considered for the next office. If you were incompetent as a tribune, you were not getting the office of Quaestor and even even make it to an election.

Applying to a modern system, it would require every candidate for presidency to complete a term as governor of a state, and before governor of a state, the mayor of a city or county chairman. Advancement to the next tier of office requires showing competence in the previous one.

File: 25628511e61ae80cb88cb5235c4c20fcacdaecdfe2be537021ca87ec1bffa3a6.gif (933KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

933KB, 500x281px

>>2832832
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29628191
yeah it's really better

>>2833128
>Politicians will find a way around laws to keep in power.

True, but the obstacles put in place by the bureaucracy in most democracy's will at least delay them.

>>2832896
>Except monarchs are to rule from their succession to the throne and until death unless they are overthrown or forced to abdicate. A bad president in a democracy will get 4-5 years of service.
Monarchs had advisors and strong men that really did the rulling you utter mongoloid.If the policies were bad they just appointed a new minister you small baller cuck.And even sugesting that the short term stupity of democracies is good is just small baller mentality

>>2833196
>small baller
>baller
Why do you speak like a nigger

>>2833201
>nigger
Go back to /pol/ you bitch ass small baller

>>2833221
>tells someone to go to /pol/
>half of their post using shit like cuck and small baller

>>2832832
No,

At least not in the historical sense. It provides a good link to a countries heritage and history in cases like Denmark and the Commonwealth but there are too many shortcomings when examined objectively.

I recommend Thomas Paine's "common sense" for a few tangible arguments against the monarchy.

>>2833128
At the very least listein to Yanis' side of the story before sprouting such bullshit

File: EdmundBurke1771.jpg (92KB, 672x800px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 672x800px

>>2833314
git out

What's the point of a monarch in these times? Most countries already have a branch of elective ejecutive power anyway. Even if you argue about
>muh study to rule a country
A fucking technocracy would be better.

>>2832832
Ask yourself OP.

Do you want to live in a European democracy, or Saudi-Arabia?

>>2833227
>not knowing it was taken from Scottish and Irish talk
>>2832832
Constitutional is like mid 19th century Victorian England or George II England
Shoe the tabs I say

>>2833360
>all monarchies are absolute theocracies
Do we use pre stressemen Germany as example of democracy then?

File: Carlos-II_1661.jpg (186KB, 1220x1600px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1220x1600px

>>2833350

No!

>>2832877
>dynastic politics requires a certain degree of incest
Nice strawman.

>>2832837
>>2832835
The fact that Spain ran smoothly with him in charge is only proof that "absolute monarchism" is an enlightenment lie and that safe guards exist and the monarchs power is limited to a political apparatus.