Democracy is a terrible idea, illustrated.

[Tigerace117]

Well the truth is the Romanovs did moderat, Tsar Alexander II was all about reform and he ate a commie bomb for his troubles.

Alexander II was all about reform because Russia desperately needed reform. The country was stagnating and falling behind on multiple levels. He was bright enough to realize that things needed to change. His successors responded by doubling down on autocracy and failing miserably to address any of the fundamental issues, nobody held them accountable, and Russia got its ass kicked.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Alexander II was all about reform because Russia desperately needed reform. The country was stagnating and falling behind on multiple levels. He was bright enough to realize that things needed to change. His successors responded by doubling down on autocracy and failing miserably to address any of the fundamental issues, nobody held them accountable, and Russia got its ass kicked.

And in any event that doesn’t change the point. The institution of the Soviet Union didn’t last its own century and after it fell Russia merely became a dictatorship with a democratic veneer.
If it simply embraced Orthodoxy Autocracy and Nationality like the Tsardom then Russia would undergo a golden age. Besides I don’t fault Alexander III for doubling down, his father wanted to reform the country and got blown up for his troubles. Nicholas II made some bad decisions sure, but the Bolsheviks made Genocide decisions the western world should’ve provided full financial and military support to the white army after WW1 and without the USSR Nazi Germany never comes along.

Gee actually maybe the Romanovs weren’t that bad after all because their fall precipitated all of the most terrible tragedies of the age

Russia became a military power because of Catherine the Great.

 

[Tigerace117]

Spain and Japan were not fascist states. Franco cannot meaningfully be called a fascist, Japan was parliamentary monarchy like Great Britain, where the emperor was a mere figurehead. And in Italy the King likewise held no real power compared to Mussolini.

....Yes, they absolutely were, and both committed horrific atrocities....especially Japan.

The Japanese were literally throwing themselves en masse against tanks and crashing planes into ships in the name of the Emperor. Had the clique running the show moved against the emperor they, simply put, would have not stayed in power.

The Italian king could have crushed Mussolini without difficulty during the march on Rome. He saw Mussolini as a “strong man” who could “impose order”, and refused to support efforts to remove Mussolini from power back before he had managed to solidify his control over the state

 

[EMNofSeattle]

....Yes, they absolutely were, and both committed horrific atrocities....especially Japan.

The Japanese were literally throwing themselves en masse against tanks and crashing planes into ships in the name of the Emperor. Had the clique running the show moved against the emperor they, simply put, would have not stayed in power.

The Italian king could have crushed Mussolini without difficulty during the march on Rome. He saw Mussolini as a “strong man” who could “impose order”, and refused to support efforts to remove Mussolini from power back before he had managed to solidify his control over the state

That may be the case, but Prime Minister Suzuki was literally running the show.

You seem to think “fascism” means “any political ideology I do not like” that is simply not the case.

If you include fascism to mean old world monarchy then your definition is so expansive that I just don’t care who you call a fascist

 

[Jetboogieman]

The level of insane in this thread is over the recommended amount.

Most people have to become hooked on, or prescribed heavy drugs to come up with this sort of utter bull****.

Hate to lower the discourse, as if that was possible but yah know, insane is insane.

 

[Tigerace117]

And in any event that doesn’t change the point. The institution of the Soviet Union didn’t last its own century and after it fell Russia merely became a dictatorship with a democratic veneer.
If it simply embraced Orthodoxy Autocracy and Nationality like the Tsardom then Russia would undergo a golden age. Besides I don’t fault Alexander III for doubling down, his father wanted to reform the country and got blown up for his troubles. Nicholas II made some bad decisions sure, but the Bolsheviks made Genocide decisions

Russia became a military power because of Catherine the Great.

The point being that the absolute monarchists, through sheer stupidity, wrecked the country, cost it multiple wars, and ultimately got themselves killed due to their own stupidity.

Inertia is not a value.

A-hem.

Black Hundreds - Wikipedia

Your delusions are rather amusing, given that when Russia was under “Orthodox Autocracy and Nationality” the country saw defeat and disaster after defeat and disaster.

Russia literally had Prussia on the ropes in the Seven Years War but Peter III coming to the throne meant it was all tossed away without a second thought. One idiot comes to power, there is no one to hold him accountable, and things promptly fall apart.

 

[Tigerace117]

That may be the case, but Prime Minister Suzuki was literally running the show.

You seem to think “fascism” means “any political ideology I do not like” that is simply not the case.

If you include fascism to mean old world monarchy then your definition is so expansive that I just don’t care who you call a fascist

It is the case. The Italian monarchy’s active collaboration with fascism is what discredited it in the eyes in the Italian people in the first place.

You not liking the fact that monarchists in many cases actively supported fascism doesn’t change it.

Hell, imagine if England had stuck with absolute monarchy. Edward VIII’s fascination with Nazism could have wrecked things quite throughly.

 

[AmNat]

Democracy is a terrible idea.

Allow me to illustrate.

Say you are traveling for the holidays, and you get on a plane to fly across the country at 35,000 feet.

Things are going well on democracy airlines, but an hour into the flight there’s a problem, and so you hear an announcement on the PA “ladies and gentlemen this is your constitutional president speaking, we have lost control of our engines and the flight attendants will be bringing you ballots to vote on the best solution”

Obviously this is insane, most people on the plane have no idea how to manage anything as complex as a commercial airliner.

So your safety when on the plane is basically an absolute dictatorship of the Captain. The captain is an educated professional who is granted full power over your life and death by a legitimate authority.

Likewise. For the complex business of running state affairs, the legitimate Authority (God through the Church) should be sanctioning one professional King to govern society. Most voters have no appreciation for complex issues and are too short sighted to their own wants.

The problem with democracy is that it vests power in those who control public opinion, i.e. the media. Because the media is not held accountable for the negative results of the policies it promotes, it is fundamentally irresponsible.

Moreover, in an advanced democracy, the government is directly advised by professional academics (the same people who educate journos), with the result that public opinion can usually be bypassed entirely. Even should a right-wing President be elected, the permanent civil service can continue to push left. Thus democracy is reduced to a mere procedural norm. Meanwhile, because this system is dependent on power being distributed among many people, a tragedy of the commons occurs, and the government is incentivized to become increasingly tyrannical (Contrary to Acton, it is partial power that corrupts absolutely. A wise autocrat, even if purely self-interested, has a vested interest in preserving his nation. Competing bureaucracies, OTOH, have an incentive to aggrandize themselves as much as possible, lest their competitors beat them to it.).

 

[Hari Seldon]

Democracy is a terrible idea.

Allow me to illustrate.

Say you are traveling for the holidays, and you get on a plane to fly across the country at 35,000 feet.

Things are going well on democracy airlines, but an hour into the flight there’s a problem, and so you hear an announcement on the PA “ladies and gentlemen this is your constitutional president speaking, we have lost control of our engines and the flight attendants will be bringing you ballots to vote on the best solution”

Obviously this is insane, most people on the plane have no idea how to manage anything as complex as a commercial airliner.

So your safety when on the plane is basically an absolute dictatorship of the Captain. The captain is an educated professional who is granted full power over your life and death by a legitimate authority.

Likewise. For the complex business of running state affairs, the legitimate Authority (God through the Church) should be sanctioning one professional King to govern society. Most voters have no appreciation for complex issues and are too short sighted to their own wants.

During an emergency or war the president has enhanced powers. Other than that I sure don't want a King. We fought a war about that a while ago. Plus look at the utter A-moral moron that was elected last time.

 

[Questerr]

Democracy is a terrible idea.

Allow me to illustrate.

Say you are traveling for the holidays, and you get on a plane to fly across the country at 35,000 feet.

Things are going well on democracy airlines, but an hour into the flight there’s a problem, and so you hear an announcement on the PA “ladies and gentlemen this is your constitutional president speaking, we have lost control of our engines and the flight attendants will be bringing you ballots to vote on the best solution”

Obviously this is insane, most people on the plane have no idea how to manage anything as complex as a commercial airliner.

So your safety when on the plane is basically an absolute dictatorship of the Captain. The captain is an educated professional who is granted full power over your life and death by a legitimate authority.

Likewise. For the complex business of running state affairs, the legitimate Authority (God through the Church) should be sanctioning one professional King to govern society. Most voters have no appreciation for complex issues and are too short sighted to their own wants.

But the elected pilot is a former reality TV star and guy who bankrupted two casinos. He doesn't know anything about flying either, yet for some reason people think he should be in charge.

Why exactly does the Church have any legitimate authority? Who says they were granted any authority from any god? Let me guess, the Church says so, right?

 

[Questerr]

Ok but what you’re talking about is the exception.

The Romanovs ruled Russia for 400 years, the Soviet Union barely lasted 80.

So in fact in most cases Monarchy provides long term stability and it’s failures are usually external and they are rare.

Democracies are usually short term and fail. We now have a near equally divided United States where both sides don’t recognize the other as legitimate. If we had an absolute monarchy and speaking against the institution of the monarchy itself was illegal then we’d have like 70% or 80% of people supporting the government and it would be stable.

Translation: "The only way a monarchy can exist is by using force against people who speak against it".

 

[EMNofSeattle]

But the elected pilot is a former reality TV star and guy who bankrupted two casinos. He doesn't know anything about flying either, yet for some reason people think he should be in charge.

Why exactly does the Church have any legitimate authority? Who says they were granted any authority from any god? Let me guess, the Church says so, right?

Well if I had my way our leader would be Queen Elizabeth and not Donald Trump.

I can’t change the past, I can only gripe about it and live in today

 

[Questerr]

I never advocated for fascism, only monarchy. Fascism is anti-monarchical.

I also said nothing about Putin or Trump or McConnell

Fascism in Spain and Italy were both pro-Monarchal. You don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Tigerace117]

Well if I had my way our leader would be Queen Elizabeth and not Donald Trump.

I can’t change the past, I can only gripe about it and live in today

Unfortunately for you the stupidity of the English monarch and his minions meant that wasn’t going to be an option.

 

[Questerr]

Well if I had my way our leader would be Queen Elizabeth and not Donald Trump.

I can’t change the past, I can only gripe about it and live in today

What exactly makes Queen Elizabeth any more qualified to govern than Trump?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Fascism in Spain and Italy were both pro-Monarchal. You don't know what you are talking about.

I reject the notion Francisco Franco was a fascist.

He’s only a fascist under the communist definition of “everyone who doesnt support communism is a fascist”

Franco was a patriot who loved his country and the Spanish Republicans were covering for a communist element that was carrying out terrorism against Catholics (including sending death squads to rape and murder nuns) and legitimately elected conservative politicians. Eventually Franco had no choice but step in and protect the Spanish people. And that’s why I pay taxes is to have a military to protect me against violent threats to my rights.

It’s true they recieved some support from Nazi Germans but it’s important to keep in mind, Nazi Germany has not yet committed the holocaust and the Soviet Union who supported the Republicans and the Mexican PNR which supported the republicans were both perpetrators of genocide.

Franco himself perpetrated no genocides.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

What exactly makes Queen Elizabeth any more qualified to govern than Trump?

Being the current office holder in a succession of legitimate Monarchs.

 

[Questerr]

I reject the notion Francisco Franco was a fascist.

He’s only a fascist under the communist definition of “everyone who doesnt support communism is a fascist”

Franco was a patriot who loved his country and the Spanish Republicans were covering for a communist element that was carrying out terrorism against Catholics (including sending death squads to rape and murder nuns) and legitimately elected conservative politicians. Eventually Franco had no choice but step in and protect the Spanish people. And that’s why I pay taxes is to have a military to protect me against violent threats to my rights.

It’s true they recieved some support from Nazi Germans but it’s important to keep in mind, Nazi Germany has not yet committed the holocaust and the Soviet Union who supported the Republicans and the Mexican PNR which supported the republicans were both perpetrators of genocide.

Franco himself perpetrated no genocides.

Franco ordered the murder of between 100,000 and 200,000 people.

White Terror (Spain) - Wikipedia

 

[Questerr]

Being the current office holder in a succession of legitimate Monarchs.

So she's somehow genetically capable of governing?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Franco ordered the murder of between 100,000 and 200,000 people.

White Terror (Spain) - Wikipedia

And?

One it’s not a genocide and two it was a reaction to violence the left started. Once you start a civil war you can’t predict how it will turn out. More Nazis died then Americans in World War Two, are you going to claim Nazi Germany was the victim?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

So she's somehow genetically capable of governing?

Well in a properly functioning monarchy those in the line of succession should be educated from childhood about governmental affairs.

That’s part in parcel why the Russian Tsardom fell is Alexander II didn’t properly educate Nicholas on governing and then died unexpectedly.

So it’s not purely genetic, but in most cases the royal family should all be involved in state affairs from childhood

 

[Questerr]

And?

One it’s not a genocide and two it was a reaction to violence the left started. Once you start a civil war you can’t predict how it will turn out. More Nazis died then Americans in World War Two, are you going to claim Nazi Germany was the victim?

A huge portion of the people Franco murdered were AFTER the civil war ended. But then again, you think even questioning hereditary dictators should be a crime, so why should be surprised you're an apologist for murder?

 

[iguanaman]

Democracy is a terrible idea.

Allow me to illustrate.

Say you are traveling for the holidays, and you get on a plane to fly across the country at 35,000 feet.

Things are going well on democracy airlines, but an hour into the flight there’s a problem, and so you hear an announcement on the PA “ladies and gentlemen this is your constitutional president speaking, we have lost control of our engines and the flight attendants will be bringing you ballots to vote on the best solution”

Obviously this is insane, most people on the plane have no idea how to manage anything as complex as a commercial airliner.

So your safety when on the plane is basically an absolute dictatorship of the Captain. The captain is an educated professional who is granted full power over your life and death by a legitimate authority.

Likewise. For the complex business of running state affairs, the legitimate Authority (God through the Church) should be sanctioning one professional King to govern society. Most voters have no appreciation for complex issues and are too short sighted to their own wants.

LOL You give new meaning to the phrase God is my co-pilot...Why not just let God fly the plane and eliminate the middleman?

 

[Questerr]

Well in a properly functioning monarchy those in the line of succession should be educated from childhood about governmental affairs.

That’s part in parcel why the Russian Tsardom fell is Alexander II didn’t properly educate Nicholas on governing and then died unexpectedly.

So it’s not purely genetic, but in most cases the royal family should all be involved in state affairs from childhood

And Queen Elizabeth has not been. In fact she has no experience with governance, and yet you think she should rule us with zero checks on her absolute power.

 

[jnug]

Being the current office holder in a succession of legitimate Monarchs.

Monarchy...great, literally the worst form of government EVER!