Hello

[Smart]

Hello. a Republican from LA here.

I'm here for discussion on today's Monarchies and Republicanism. I respect a Monarchist's right to put another human above them (a fundamental denial of humanism, democracy and civilization).

Thanks for having me.

Windsorists be prepared.

 

[Lusa_Monarquia]

Hello Smart, welcome to the forum.

The monarchies of Europe are now all democracies and, according to the Democracy Ranking (Democracy Ranking) more democratic than some that call themselves republics.

Does a President feel "above another human"? or do we treat them as equals? Well it depends on the president, I guess (say that to cubans, or chinese republicans (and so many other)...).

 

[Smart]

Hello Smart, welcome to the forum.

The monarchies of Europe are now all democracies and, according to the Democracy Ranking (Democracy Ranking) more democratic than some that call themselves republics.

Does a President feel "above another human"? or do we treat them as equals? Well it depends on the president, I guess (say that to cubans, or chinese republicans (and so many other)...).

Democracy implies the people are in charge, this is not the case. All residents of a Kingdom, whether constitutional or absolute are subjects of the Monarch. They are second-rate from a hierarchy POV. While freedom is exceedingly high in Northern Europe (the base of Europe's Monarchies - UK, the Benelux, DK-NO-SW, etc being located there) that does not reflect on the validity of Monarchy - considering in none of those countries does the Monarch have any true say either in politics or in the culture of the given nation. They're exalted humans, reminiscent of the Oligarchs of Sparta.

Also please show a little fairness - you are comparing the first-world with second-world/third-world dictatorships passed off as Republics. The failure of non-Western countries in the implementation of Democracy does not reflect the validity of the Republican system - afterall, 99% of these countries would do no better with a Monarch. a Failed regime is a failed regime, regardless if it has a King, Dear Leader or President.

Now if you compare Western Republics with Western Monarchies, the playing field is very balanced. On one side you have Norway-Sweden-Netherlands-Luxembourg-Monaco, and on the other you have US-Russia-France-Switzerland-Italy-Germany.

Considering the size and pop. of the Republics is overwhelming compared to the Monarchies, it would be unfair to compare "democracy". Afterall, giving proper rights to 7-9 million people is a lot easier than (310million,62 million, 80 million, etc). One could make arguments that in the West, the head of state has little significance (except in the US, for example), and thus a comparison of say, Putin to Beatrix would be unsatisfactory.

In summary, The West will ultimately abolish Monarchy. You are at best delaying the process. When this is accomplished, the rest of the world will follow suit.

by 2100 most if not all Monarchies will disappear.

Outposts of Tyranny (as Condi Rice put it) should be taken from the list of countries in such a comparison. These (North Korea, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Iran, Burma, etc) are failed regimes that will disappear eventually. Sooner the better.

Edit - Are you a Portuguese Monarchist, by chance?

 

[Lusa_Monarquia]

Well it is a matter of culture, isn't it? How can you say that by 2100 monarchies will disappear? just because in the States that doesn't make sense?
Hierarchy exists everywhere! in monarchies, in republics, in companies, even in trains or planes! The world does not live without hierarchy (it is a beautiful thought, but it is not real)...
A Monarchy, of course, would never work in US. It's not in US mind or culture to have monarchs (as it is not in European culture to look at actresses as if they were Gods...). A Monarchy would never work in US as a Republic would never work in UK, for instance, or as it isn't working in Portugal, where the supporters of are growing each day (about 30% of the population declared themselves to be monarchists... a litter more than that declare themselves republicans). Portugal is a country with almost 900 years of history, only 100 of them being a republic. Portugal was an empire in 1910 (with monarchy), now we hardly are a country... So as you said, we find great monarchies and great republics, each country and each people should be able to choose what is better for them. Unfortunately, unlike most monarchies that already asked people if they want to be monarchies or republics, republican countries don't ask the question. The republic, in most cases, was imposed, constitution was changed, and people don't have the right to choose (is that democracy?) (sorry if my English is confusing).

 

[Smart]

Well it is a matter of culture, isn't it? How can you say that by 2100 monarchies will disappear? just because in the States that doesn't make sense?
Hierarchy exists everywhere! in monarchies, in republics, in companies, even in trains or planes! The world does not live without hierarchy (it is a beautiful thought, but it is not real)...
A Monarchy, of course, would never work in US. It's not in US mind or culture to have monarchs (as it is not in European culture to look at actresses as if they were Gods...). A Monarchy would never work in US as a Republic would never work in UK, for instance, or as it isn't working in Portugal, where the supporters of are growing each day (about 30% of the population declared themselves to be monarchists... a litter more than that declare themselves republicans). Portugal is a country with almost 900 years of history, only 100 of them being a republic. Portugal was an empire in 1910 (with monarchy), now we hardly are a country... So as you said, we find great monarchies and great republics, each country and each people should be able to choose what is better for them. Unfortunately, unlike most monarchies that already asked people if they want to be monarchies or republics, republican countries don't ask the question. The republic, in most cases, was imposed, constitution was changed, and people don't have the right to choose (is that democracy?) (sorry if my English is confusing).

Well, you assume that merely because I'm American (a product of my birth), that I will automatically be "Behead the Tyrants!" - this is not the case. I do support Monarchy - actual Monarchy.

For me, Monarchy is legitimate only when the given Monarchy has historical ties to the given land, is of its major ethic group, and has reigned successfully in the past. Examples would be the Capet lines of France, the various German dukes, etc. I also strictly adhere to Salic Law. Thus making nearly all current reigning monarchs completely illegitimate. As they lack patrilineal descent from the founder (of the given dynasty). Perhaps I'm too traditional, but it seems to me that the essence of Monarchy is a line of Kings with noble blood. This distinction, is why they are legitimate. You'll note the Sun King as my avatar.

I believe you are confusing positions (which go top to bottom) and hierarchy (which is not necessarily the same in the case of Monarchs)

The traditional format/Pyramid:
God
King
Nobility
Free men
Serfs - Slaves
all others

This is not equal to the Republican pyramid:
Head of State (President)
Central Government elected by People
Lower institutions - autonomous regions, state governments, etc
All citizens (18+)

As you can see, the Monarchy system is entirely archaic, it lacks proper citizenship for its residents. In a Republic, all people are equal, this is not the case in Monarchy.

"A Republic would never work in the UK"
Well, with the dissolution of the Union, the de-establishment of the Church of England and the abolition of the English Monarchy being future events, it seems that your statement is false. Scotland and Wales will become independent, and hopefully ditch Eliz on their way out.

If the Portuguese Monarchy will bring Portugal out of second-rank status in Western Europe, I'd gladly support it. I have a deep admiration of Portugal, as of 2010, it is the only Iberian Republic (hopefully, Catalonia, Galicia and the Basque Country will join it in Iberian Republicanism).

There have been no formal referendums to offer a Republic. What did you mean by this?

And no worries on English, it's not my native language either.

 

[Lusa_Monarquia]

There have been no formal referendums to offer a Republic. What did you mean by this?

No referendums were offered and the republican constitution does not allow it to be (the monarchic constitution of 1836 allowed it, but republicanism was not strong enough by then... so the king was killed and republic imposed). I believe the only republican country that offered a referendum was Brazil, where republic won. Even Italy offered a referendum but never counted the votes, imposing republic (and officially saying that it had won).

Talking about Portugal, the actual heir of the throne is descendent of our first king (from 1143), and I believe that happens in many of the monarchies of Europe (maybe not directly, but indirectly the actual monarchs link to the first one). Independently of that, and if you are talking about democracy, it is not very democratic to impose republic. And it is not undemocratic to have a king now, if people want it, even if they have no monarchic tradition. Who are we to say: "this is archaic you can not choose to have this, you have to be a republic because that is fair..."... Monarchies in Europe are very fair. Most People love their countries, love their monarchs and all their traditions (which are much more respected in monarchic countries... and yes I'm complaining about the lack of respect our Portuguese republic has for all that is beautiful, traditional and unique in Portugal). Besides, we have a republic but people still call our heir of the throne for His Majesty. And sorry, but it republic not everybody is the same (maybe in theory it is, but not actually, and sorry I don't make my mind on theory but looking, comparing and deciding what is more fair... And in comparising, in Europe, Monarchic countries are better to live in, more fair, more respectful and more democratic (I don't give a damn for theory).