Monarchy Is the Best Form of Government

[TER]

have you discussed this with the Lady of the lake?

I don't understand. Who is the Lady of the lake?

[TER]

I was also responding to the other pro-monarchy guy in this thread and everyone else that brought up Hope.

What's really amazing to me is that we don't even have a democracy right now, we have an oligarchy that very much mirrors a feudal system. We just don't have the military dictator yet that you all are so keen on lol.

By the way, a good example if you want to make your case as a starting point would probably be Libya. I've heard that they were doing pretty well under Ghaddafi but I haven't really looked into it.

Actually, they weren't doing bad (relatively speaking for that culture and part of the world) until a democratically elected government came and dropped bombs on them and assassinated the leader.

[heavenlyboy34]

I was also responding to the other pro-monarchy guy in this thread and everyone else that brought up Hope.

What's really amazing to me is that we don't even have a democracy right now, we have an oligarchy that very much mirrors a feudal system. We just don't have the military dictator yet that you all are so keen on lol.

By the way, a good example if you want to make your case as a starting point would probably be Libya. I've heard that they were doing pretty well under Ghaddafi but I haven't really looked into it.

Aye. Ghaddafi didn't let the international bankers and Big Business control Libya. That's why he was taken out. (another common trait of democracies and republics is a strong tendency toward cronyism, corporatism, and militarism, btw)

[Anti Federalist]

I don't understand. Who is the Lady of the lake?

LOL - Watch this:

[heavenlyboy34]

You say that the monarch will be logical and embrace free-markets (even if this is false) and yet do not give the same credit to 'voters', they truly benefit from free-markets and so it would be logical that their voting outcomes would embrace free-markets.

It indeed seems logical at first, but history hath shewn that voters normally want stuff and "safety"-not liberty or free markets.

[heavenlyboy34]

Keep feeling the warm fuzzies over how heterodox you are lol. Super cool

[TER]

LOL - Watch this:

LOL Now I got it. Love that movie!

[ArrestPoliticians]

Aye. Ghaddafi didn't let the international bankers and Big Business control Libya. That's why he was taken out. (another common trait of democracies and republics is a strong tendency toward cronyism, corporatism, and militarism, btw)

But he also was socialistic. Btw imperialism and colonialism were not alien to monarchs and dictator.

[ArrestPoliticians]

have you discussed this with the Lady of the lake?

Been laughing for 10 minutes over this lol

[heavenlyboy34]

But he also was socialistic.

Sure. But that's a social norm in that part of the world. Neither socialism nor any other economic philosophy is "good" or "bad" according to economic science.

Btw imperialism and colonialism were not alien to monarchs and dictator.

True. But it was never so irrational before democracy. The collectivism of political power in democracy removed all sense of accountability and reason from the higher levels of political power. (IOW, irrationality is highly incentivized in democracy)

[ArrestPoliticians]

Simply not remotely historically accurate.

[Firestarter]

I cannot understand how anybody (besides the Royal families) could prefer a Monarchy. I will illustrate my reply with some examples from the Kingdom of the Netherlands, where I’ve survived numerous assassination attempts.

POLITRICS IN A MONARCHY
Let me first explain about the character of politrics in an absolute monarchy. Because the King/Queen (instead of what they make us believe) in reality depends on the support of enough people, they need to have some popularity, and have decreed “democratic” elections.
The subjects of the monarch can choose between the political parties founded by the Monarch. The reason the Monarchs have chosen for this solution, so they can blame their politicians whenever a scandal becomes too obvious. If you look at it in this way a monarchy has all the disadvantages of politrics in a democracy plus the tremendous costs of the thievery of the Royals.
The monarchy becomes even worse out of the comparison when you realize that the monarch will only choose corrupt politicians that are even less intelligent than the Monarch himself. So in a monarchy the politicians are even worse than in a “democracy” (but democracy is only a Utopian concept that has never anywhere existed).
A clear example is that Premier Mark Rutte studied at the same university and faculty as King Willem-Alexander in the same period (Rijksuniversiteit Leiden, Geschiedenis). The amount of former students of the Rijksuniversiteit Leiden and the fraternity (Minerva) of the Dutch Royals in cabinet is really amazing. In the first cabinet Rutte (installed in 2010 by then Queen Beatrix): 6 of the 12 ministers studied in Leiden with 4 members of Minerva. In the second cabinet Rutte (installed in 2012): “only” 4 ministers studied in Leiden. Also former minister and Secretary-General of NATO Jaap de Hoop Scheffer was a member of Minerva.
The monarchs of the Netherlands have even regularly placed their most trusted puppets from the Raad van State at key positions in cabinet: 1) Willem Scholten was selected for the Raad van State in 1976 and became a minister from 1978 to 1980 (in the aftermath of the Lockheed affair), and from 1980 – 1997 was vice-president of the Raad van State; 2) Piet Hein Donner was selected for the Raad van State in 1998. In 2002 he was chosen by Beatrix as Minister van Justitie (that’s Newspeak for Justice); he was minister until December 2011, when he became vice-president of the Raad van State. His father was a member of the European Court of Justice and part of the Commissie van drie that covered up the bribes Prince Bernhard took from Lockheed and Northrop.
When Donner was Minister van justitie, I was coincidentally tortured for half a year in a psychiatric hospital.
Before Brexit a landslide voted against the EU/Ukraine association agreement, 61% against, 39% for. King Willem-Alexander went ahead as if nothing happened, because his subjects don´t have a thing to say: http://www.express.co.uk/news/politi...sa-free-travel

DEGENERATE OFFSPRING
Royal families try to convince others they are superior by birth, but in reality the opposite is true.
Because Royals life the easy life, they degenerate with each generation. This can easily be understood when you look at it from the viewpoint of evolution. In reality it is only hardship that improves a species of animals.
That the degeneration is even worse becomes apparent when you consider the great amount of intermarriages between Royals (including marriages between cousins), which makes that Royals don’t have sufficient variety in genes.
It is not easy to see if the degeneration also applies to the subjects of monarch. Obviously the subjects suffer from the cruel dictatorship, which should improve them with each generation, more than a democracy (from the viewpoint of evolution). But on the other hand, because the monarch feels threatened by everybody with superior qualities: the best people in a monarchy are simply eliminated (so this could mean that the population in a monarchy degenerates because of the monarchy).

EXAMPLES – BAYBASIN AND LENSINK
The Turkish Kurd Huseyin Baybasın was “helped” by his attorney Mr. D. Moszkowicz to refuse to defend himself in the court case. After Donner became Minister van justitie on July 22, already on July 30, 2002 Baybasin was sentenced to life in prison, based on falsified tapes. On October 21, 2003 the Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) confirmed the sentence to life in prison, because the government agency Nederlands Forensisch Instituut (NFI), that investigated the reliability of the tapes, is beyond doubt. On July 6, 2006 the ECHR decided that the human rights of Baybasin were violated in the Netherland because he was inhumanly treated: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{"fulltext":["baybasin netherlands"],"itemid":["001-76262"]}
After Erwin Lensink threw a small object to the Gouden koets of Queen Beatrix he was declared insane and tortured in a psychiatric hospital and was also imprisoned. Lensink has an interesting web site (mostly in Dutch) – topics include anti-psychiatry, Bilderberg and paedophilia: http://erwinlensinkvrij.nl

CORRUPTION/VIOLATING HUMAN RIGHTS
Because the monarch has supreme control over education, media, legislative force (politrics) and the courts, he can get away with just about anything. And when some scandal reaches the public, some politician simply takes the fall.
About a month ago July 14, a citizen of the Netherlands got sentenced to 30 days in jail for insulting King Willem-Alexander. This man called our King: murderer, rapist, oppressor and thief (which should be allowed when there’s freedom of speech). When I read the verdict I noticed that his own attorney had pleaded against him.
It was found out that the yearly maintenance costs for the yacht the Groene Draeck of Princess Beatrix cost the tax payer 95,000 euro per year, instead of 32,500 euro. Later it became clear that the tax payer had spent 1,5 million Euro from 2004 to 2015 on maintenance for the boat (for which you could buy 2 boats). It is not difficult to imagine where this money went (but very difficult to prove): http://www.theroyalforums.com/tag/groene-draeck/
These are a lot more examples. It is not only tax money that finds their way to the Royal family, but they can also place their family and friends in easy well-paying jobs and make large profits in insider trading because they have foreknowledge of what will happen (they are the ones that decide!). When the Dutch central bank (DNB) had to be bought by the tax payers, they let them pay much more than the market value (while they still decide what happens). They also “sold” their palaces for much more than the market price and the Royals are the only ones that can life in these. When ABN AMRO bank wasn´t doing too well, the Monarch decided that the tax payer must compensate their losses (the Royals owned a large percentage of the stocks).
The history of Prince Bernhard is filled with corruption. Prince Bernhard was heavily involved in the international weapons trade. He received some 2 million dollar from the American corporations Lockheed and Northrop. When this was found out he didn´t get any kind of punishment in the Netherlands (he could even keep the money). At the beginning of the 1950s Bernhard was trading weapons to Indonesia and tried to stage a coup, he also in vain tried to exchange devaluated Dutch-Indonesian banknotes, what would’ve cost the Dutch tax payer 50 million guilders.

[Athan]

The history books also demonstrate the many horrors and crimes against humanity of democracies/republics unrivaled by monarchs. Pick your poison.

Yes, I will pick the poison that won't place me less than a monarch, one that will guarantee me arms to rebel against authority, and one that allows for upward mobility. You can go to england if you want. I'm staying in Texas.

[P3ter_Griffin]

I agree. Simply going into monarchy does not fix our economic problems, without it being led by a good, just, and virtuous king.

It indeed seems logical at first, but history hath shewn that voters normally want stuff and "safety"-not liberty or free markets.

I agree with both of you. It is the players and not the system that matter, no matter how logical it may be perceived that the chosen system will provide maximum liberty. I think that America is a great example of that. If the constitution was obeyed we would be pretty well off, as far as governments go. But it takes action, not a system, to maintain liberty.

[heavenlyboy34]

I cannot understand how anybody (besides the Royal families) could prefer a Monarchy. I will illustrate my reply with some examples from the Kingdom of the Netherlands, where I’ve survived numerous assassination attempts.

POLITRICS IN A MONARCHY
Let me first explain about the character of politrics in an absolute monarchy. Because the King/Queen (instead of what they make us believe) in reality depends on the support of enough people, they need to have some popularity, and have decreed “democratic” elections.
The subjects of the monarch can choose between the political parties founded by the Monarch. The reason the Monarchs have chosen for this solution, so they can blame their politicians whenever a scandal becomes too obvious. If you look at it in this way a monarchy has all the disadvantages of politrics in a democracy plus the tremendous costs of the thievery of the Royals.
The monarchy becomes even worse out of the comparison when you realize that the monarch will only choose corrupt politicians that are even less intelligent than the Monarch himself. So in a monarchy the politicians are even worse than in a “democracy” (but democracy is only a Utopian concept that has never anywhere existed).
A clear example is that Premier Mark Rutte studied at the same university and faculty as King Willem-Alexander in the same period (Rijksuniversiteit Leiden, Geschiedenis). The amount of former students of the Rijksuniversiteit Leiden and the fraternity (Minerva) of the Dutch Royals in cabinet is really amazing. In the first cabinet Rutte (installed in 2010 by then Queen Beatrix): 6 of the 12 ministers studied in Leiden with 4 members of Minerva. In the second cabinet Rutte (installed in 2012): “only” 4 ministers studied in Leiden. Also former minister and Secretary-General of NATO Jaap de Hoop Scheffer was a member of Minerva.
The monarchs of the Netherlands have even regularly placed their most trusted puppets from the Raad van State at key positions in cabinet: 1) Willem Scholten was selected for the Raad van State in 1976 and became a minister from 1978 to 1980 (in the aftermath of the Lockheed affair), and from 1980 – 1997 was vice-president of the Raad van State; 2) Piet Hein Donner was selected for the Raad van State in 1998. In 2002 he was chosen by Beatrix as Minister van Justitie (that’s Newspeak for Justice); he was minister until December 2011, when he became vice-president of the Raad van State. His father was a member of the European Court of Justice and part of the Commissie van drie that covered up the bribes Prince Bernhard took from Lockheed and Northrop.
When Donner was Minister van justitie, I was coincidentally tortured for half a year in a psychiatric hospital.
Before Brexit a landslide voted against the EU/Ukraine association agreement, 61% against, 39% for. King Willem-Alexander went ahead as if nothing happened, because his subjects don´t have a thing to say: http://www.express.co.uk/news/politi...sa-free-travel

DEGENERATE OFFSPRING
Royal families try to convince others they are superior by birth, but in reality the opposite is true.
Because Royals life the easy life, they degenerate with each generation. This can easily be understood when you look at it from the viewpoint of evolution. In reality it is only hardship that improves a species of animals.
That the degeneration is even worse becomes apparent when you consider the great amount of intermarriages between Royals (including marriages between cousins), which makes that Royals don’t have sufficient variety in genes.
It is not easy to see if the degeneration also applies to the subjects of monarch. Obviously the subjects suffer from the cruel dictatorship, which should improve them with each generation, more than a democracy (from the viewpoint of evolution). But on the other hand, because the monarch feels threatened by everybody with superior qualities: the best people in a monarchy are simply eliminated (so this could mean that the population in a monarchy degenerates because of the monarchy).

EXAMPLES – BAYBASIN AND LENSINK
The Turkish Kurd Huseyin Baybasın was “helped” by his attorney Mr. D. Moszkowicz to refuse to defend himself in the court case. After Donner became Minister van justitie on July 22, already on July 30, 2002 Baybasin was sentenced to life in prison, based on falsified tapes. On October 21, 2003 the Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) confirmed the sentence to life in prison, because the government agency Nederlands Forensisch Instituut (NFI), that investigated the reliability of the tapes, is beyond doubt. On July 6, 2006 the ECHR decided that the human rights of Baybasin were violated in the Netherland because he was inhumanly treated: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{"fulltext":["baybasin netherlands"],"itemid":["001-76262"]}
After Erwin Lensink threw a small object to the Gouden koets of Queen Beatrix he was declared insane and tortured in a psychiatric hospital and was also imprisoned. Lensink has an interesting web site (mostly in Dutch) – topics include anti-psychiatry, Bilderberg and paedophilia: http://erwinlensinkvrij.nl

CORRUPTION/VIOLATING HUMAN RIGHTS
Because the monarch has supreme control over education, media, legislative force (politrics) and the courts, he can get away with just about anything. And when some scandal reaches the public, some politician simply takes the fall.
About a month ago July 14, a citizen of the Netherlands got sentenced to 30 days in jail for insulting King Willem-Alexander. This man called our King: murderer, rapist, oppressor and thief (which should be allowed when there’s freedom of speech). When I read the verdict I noticed that his own attorney had pleaded against him.
It was found out that the yearly maintenance costs for the yacht the Groene Draeck of Princess Beatrix cost the tax payer 95,000 euro per year, instead of 32,500 euro. Later it became clear that the tax payer had spent 1,5 million Euro from 2004 to 2015 on maintenance for the boat (for which you could buy 2 boats). It is not difficult to imagine where this money went (but very difficult to prove): http://www.theroyalforums.com/tag/groene-draeck/
These are a lot more examples. It is not only tax money that finds their way to the Royal family, but they can also place their family and friends in easy well-paying jobs and make large profits in insider trading because they have foreknowledge of what will happen (they are the ones that decide!). When the Dutch central bank (DNB) had to be bought by the tax payers, they let them pay much more than the market value (while they still decide what happens). They also “sold” their palaces for much more than the market price and the Royals are the only ones that can life in these. When ABN AMRO bank wasn´t doing too well, the Monarch decided that the tax payer must compensate their losses (the Royals owned a large percentage of the stocks).
The history of Prince Bernhard is filled with corruption. Prince Bernhard was heavily involved in the international weapons trade. He received some 2 million dollar from the American corporations Lockheed and Northrop. When this was found out he didn´t get any kind of punishment in the Netherlands (he could even keep the money). At the beginning of the 1950s Bernhard was trading weapons to Indonesia and tried to stage a coup, he also in vain tried to exchange devaluated Dutch-Indonesian banknotes, what would’ve cost the Dutch tax payer 50 million guilders.

LOLOL Weak-ass study is weak. The Romanov Dynasty brought peace and prosperity to Russia unrivaled before or since-to name but one of many examples. The importation of democracy to Russia brought with it mass destruction, death, war, poverty, genocide, democide, and pretty much every horror you can think of.

[heavenlyboy34]

Simply not remotely historically accurate.

Still wrong. Have a nice day! ~hugs~

[Firestarter]

LOLOL Weak-ass study is weak. The Romanov Dynasty brought peace and prosperity to Russia unrivaled before or since-to name but one of many examples. The importation of democracy to Russia brought with it mass destruction, death, war, poverty, genocide, democide, and pretty much every horror you can think of.

If I remember correctly the Romanov Dynasty was brought down because they supported Abraham Lincoln in the American civil war; Lincoln started printing debt-free money and was later executed.
While I don't know why the Romanovs supported democracy in the USA, it were the Zionist Rothschilds that financed communism, that lynched all the Romanovs.
I don't know how democratic Russia was before the reign of the Romanovs, but the communist Soviet Union was certainly no democracy. The horrible crimes of Stalin are indeed evidence that a democracy is better than dictatorship (see for example the million killed by starvation in the Ukraine). I wouldn't call the one-party-state Soviet Union a republic, and I don't think it's fair to call the horrors of communism an argument for any monarchy.
Years before communism took control of Russia, the Rothschilds in Baku already paid Joseph Stalin to end a strike by the way.

[HVACTech]

If I remember correctly the Romanov Dynasty was brought down because they supported Abraham Lincoln in the American civil war; Lincoln started printing debt-free money and was later executed.
While I don't know why the Romanovs supported democracy in the USA, it were the Zionist Rothschilds that financed communism, that lynched all the Romanovs.
I don't know how democratic Russia was before the reign of the Romanovs, but the communist Soviet Union was certainly no democracy. The horrible crimes of Stalin are indeed evidence that a democracy is better than dictatorship (see for example the million killed by starvation in the Ukraine). I wouldn't call the one-party-state Soviet Union a republic, and I don't think it's fair to call the horrors of communism an argument for any monarchy.
Years before communism took control of Russia, the Rothschilds in Baku already paid Joseph Stalin to end a strike by the way.

help me to understand your definition of "Democracy" and "Republic".

me likes to keep things simple. Democracy = 1 man, 1 vote. majority rules. Republic. = a "rule of law" is somehow involved.
how do you distinguish between the two?

I would NEVER confuse a VFD (variable frequency drive) with an ECM (electronically commutated motor).
YES! both types provide variable speed control... however, one is AC, the other DC.

that is HVAC sophistry. or, did I just lie to you?
as sophistry is rampant on RPFs.

is it possible to differentiate a Republic, from a Democracy?

[Dr.3D]

help me to understand your definition of "Democracy" and "Republic".

me likes to keep things simple. Democracy = 1 man, 1 vote. majority rules. Republic. = a "rule of law" is somehow involved.
how do you distinguish between the two?

I would NEVER confuse a VFD (variable frequency drive) with an ECM (electronically commutated motor).
YES! both types provide variable speed control... however, one is AC, the other DC.

that is HVAC sophistry. or, did I just lie to you?
as sophistry is rampant on RPFs.

is it possible to differentiate a Republic, from a Democracy?

This little video might help...

[heavenlyboy34]

This little video might help...

'Murican Republicanism is a type of democracy (indirect/representative). Too bad they conveniently forget to teach this in skools nowadays.

[HVACTech]

'Murican Republicanism is a type of democracy (indirect/representative). Too bad they conveniently forget to teach this in skools nowadays.

do you have any PROOF that Democracy is legal in this country?
our Founders were VERY clear on this subject.

please provide supporting evidence for such a vacuous claim as this.

[HVACTech]

Section 4 - Republican form of government guaranteed. Each State to be protected.

The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union, a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence.

— United States Constitution Article 4, Section 4

"Democracy is the most vile form of government. ... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as the have been violent in their deaths."

— James Madison (1751-1836) Father of the Constitution, 4th President of the U. S.

“The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness, which the ambitious call, and the ignorant believe to be, liberty.”

— Fisher Ames (1758-1808) Founding Father and framer of the First Amendment to the Constitution

Every government is a parliament of whores. The trouble is, in a democracy, the whores are us.

— P. J. O'Rourke (1947--) Political ournalist, writer, and author

“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.”

— Winston Churchill (1874-1965), British Politician & Leader.

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”

— Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) Third President of the United States

[Firestarter]

is it possible to differentiate a Republic, from a Democracy?

Democracy is a theoretical concept invented by the ancient Greeks, in which the people decide what happens, instead of the elite. In reality nobody has even tried to lay the foundation of a democracy. There has never ever been any form of government, that can be called a democracy.

Formally every state that doesn't have a monarchy for a head of state, is a republic. If you follow this definition the communist Soviet Union was a republic.

[HVACTech]

Democracy is a theoretical concept invented by the ancient Greeks, in which the people decide what happens, instead of the elite. In reality nobody has even tried to lay the foundation of a democracy. There has never ever been any form of government, that can be called a democracy.

Formally every state that doesn't have a monarchy for a head of state, is a republic. If you follow this definition the communist Soviet Union was a republic.

I agree sir.
that a Republic has a "rule of law" does not define what it is based upon. it can be based on anything.
it is the only form that allows for a choice in such matters.

when the people. cannot define the meaning of the words that they use....
how can they ever agree on anything?

[r3volution 3.0]

I agree with both of you. It is the players and not the system that matter, no matter how logical it may be perceived that the chosen system will provide maximum liberty.

Why does the market economy work better than socialism?

Is it because people living in a market economy are better?

...or is it because they operate within different incentives?

I agree. Simply going into monarchy does not fix our economic problems, without it being led by a good, just, and virtuous king.

If the political elite are good, just, and virtuous, then the form of government doesn't matter.

But if the political elite are greedy (which they typically are), then monarchy is superior, for reasons explained.

Completely irrelevant to your point everyone knows that democracies Trend toward social democracy. I want to know how free the markets are and how large the markets are compared to what they are under monarchy. Prove your point show us the free-market monarchies.

...?

That's exactly what those charts show.

More government spending means more governmental interference in the market.

I'm saying that if the ruler is materially self-interested, and has a basic understand of economics, he will pursue liberal policies.

Okay so this is just an absolute speculation based on a pipe dream and not based on anything to do with human nature or the laws of economics, and the fact that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Removing very very basic checks and balances will accomplish this. Create a Government monopoly claim on all property. Got it.

I posted a lengthy argument, based in economics, to support my position.

You have not rebutted any of it, in fact you've barely addressed it at all; you're just asserting that I'm wrong.

What's really amazing to me is that we don't even have a democracy right now, we have an oligarchy that very much mirrors a feudal system. We just don't have the military dictator yet that you all are so keen on lol.

Democracy = government elected by mass suffrage

That is what we have.

If you don't like the results of this system, perhaps you should rethink your support for it.

[ArrestPoliticians]

I completely rebutted your economic arguments by pointing out that they were nothing more than a fallacy of division and misapplied economic theory.

[ArrestPoliticians]

Also, the idea that I support the current situation is disingenuous, unless you are willing to accept the blame for Nazi Germany. Of course, contrary to history, you claim that you support a hypothetical "libertarian" king(oxymoron). Yet you don't afford me the same luxury.

[r3volution 3.0]

I completely rebutted your economic arguments by pointing out that they were nothing more than a fallacy of division and misapplied economic theory.

You've asserted that. In which post did you explain how I misapplied economic theory?

[Son_of_Liberty90]

You bow to Kings in all but name. The Minority of One only matters to a very small percentage of the population. FYI, America was a Constitutional Republic. Y'all gave that up after Lincoln's regime got done.

Why do you say "y'all" like you're distancing yourself from it?

[Son_of_Liberty90]

Wishful thinking. Would be nice if it worked the way you want it to, but it doesn't.

Yet the magnanimous, totally just and incorruptible laissez faire king is not wishful thinking.