A Monarchist Party?

[Raginfridus]

Democracy is not socialism. It is rule by mood according to the mob.

Not even sure why I bother responding to such blatant inaccuracy.

You so sexy.

 

[osan]

You so sexy.

I know.

The crosses I must bear...

 

[Raginfridus]

I know.

The crosses I must bear...

 

[pcosmar]

As far as parties go, it's one of the better ones.

Nimrod for supreme leader?

Authoritarianism has been done. and is still done.

am not in favor, in this reality.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Nimrod for supreme leader?

Authoritarianism has been done. and is still done.

am not in favor, in this reality.

Why do you equate monarchy and authoritarianism?

Does liberty = the right to vote (to oppress your neighbors more than the king would on his own)?

 

[Raginfridus]

Hogarth's Humors of an Election capture the spirit of democracy through all times:

The maimed veteran votes establishment, the mentally retarded vote for his rival. Nothing's changed but the clothes on their backs.

Each state must be free to decide it's government - if it wants to be a State for that matter. Sometimes I wonder why states insist on their sovereignty, when they forgo state's rights in favor of pleasing the Federalis, or neighboring governments, over their citizens, then I remember the 14th Amendment. I think most of the country would be better off administered not at all, or by monarchs or tightly restricted republics.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Why do you equate monarchy and authoritarianism?

Does liberty = the right to vote (to oppress your neighbors more than the king would on his own)?

+rep

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Saudi is a monarchy it is not exactly paradise for those who live there and couldn't possibly be in a lifetime in its present territorial state. You have a large shia population in the southwest and east represented by a sunni king.

Bad example. Saudis are tools of the West, for one. Second, the Saudi royal family is a clusterfuck of factions and clans for complex historical reasons as well as influence of Westerners.

 

[Lamp]

We can have a king but only if I pick the king.

 

[osan]

Why do you equate monarchy and authoritarianism?

 

[pcosmar]

Does liberty = the right to vote (to oppress your neighbors more than the king would on his own)?

You are confusing democracy with liberty.

 

[pcosmar]

Bad example. Saudis are tools of the West, for one. Second, the Saudi royal family is a cluster$#@! of factions and clans for complex historical reasons as well as influence of Westerners.

and what Royal family isn't?

Seems a good an example as any.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

You are confusing democracy with liberty.

To the contrary, I was suggesting that you were doing so.

and what Royal family isn't?

Through history, the average monarchy has been much more liberal (less spending, taxing, regulating, police-stating, etc) than the average democracy. Even today (and there are only a handful of monarchies in the world), they're above average. I posted about this a few months ago at some length, comparing current monarchies and democracies on the basis of the economic freedom index. And this should be not be surprising if you do economic analysis of different forms of government. The theory suggests just what the empirical evidence demonstrates.

 

[pcosmar]

To the contrary, I was suggesting that you were doing so.



Through history, the average monarchy has been much more liberal (less spending, taxing, regulating, police-stating, etc) than the average democracy. Even today (and there are only a handful of monarchies in the world), they're above average. I posted about this a few months ago at some length, comparing current monarchies and democracies on the basis of the economic freedom index. And this should be not be surprising if you do economic analysis of different forms of government. The theory suggests just what the empirical evidence demonstrates.

So one Authoritarian government spends less that some other Authoritarian government,, and you think it is superior to limited government with little authority.
I don't think so,, and I question your priorities.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

So one Authoritarian government spends less that some other Authoritarian government,, and you think it is superior to limited government with little authority.
I don't think so,, and I question your priorities.

Define the word "authoritarian."

 

[pcosmar]

Define the word "authoritarian."

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authoritarian
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/authoritarian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism
https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism

Authoritarianism, principle of blind submission to authority, as opposed to individual freedom of thought and action.

The opposite of Liberty.

and "you're Welcome."

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Authoritarianism, principle of blind submission to authority, as opposed to individual freedom of thought and action

And why do you think that's more applicable to monarchy than democracy?

So one Authoritarian government spends less that some other Authoritarian government

A government which spends and taxes less is better than a government which spends and taxes more, yes.

limited government with little authority

What's that? A government with a Constitution, which is ignored?

 

[pcosmar]

What's that? A government with a Constitution, which is ignored?

It would be nice if it were not ignored.

Government (a nebulous thing) should have no money to spend.. so your only point, is moot.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

It would be nice if it were not ignored.

But they are, and inevitably so.

Government (a nebulous thing) should have no money to spend.. so your only point, is moot.

If a government has no money to spend, it doesn't exist.

So, are you advocating anarcho-capitalism?

BTW, I'm still not sure why you think monarchy is more "authoritarian" than other forms of government, if that's your claim.

 

[The Gold Standard]

A monarchy is better than a democracy in that when people realize they are being screwed, you just kill the king. In other words, the only way it is better, or even different, is the ease of which it can be abolished.