>>
|
No. 1142
[Edit]
File
161483074750.png
- (505.13KB
, 650x750
, ZZY 0019.png
)
>>1140 Here again. Adding to this subject in more detail.
But anyway, that post touches on it but not really. The problem with using the middle ages as a reference is that they are the middle ages, you cannot really compare the working conditions or whatever of somebody in that era to now or to monarchism, the example I mentioned myself was of the Teutonic order, a Theocracy not a monarchy but the way life of the common peasant was largely the same as were most laws and rules(though tournaments were banned) it's nothing to do with the government but the times, you could find republics that had similar laws as well. So it's interesting but not so relevant.
So anyway. The problems with democracy are many. Really it's a competition between two parties of oligarchs, you will find that politicians either are businessman, were businessman, have close relations with businessman or rely on businessman. Therefore the manner in which the country is run is to the benefit of big business. That is the overall theme. Within that you have two competing parties of the aforementioned that are trying to both appease business(or themselves) and tell sweet lies to the masses in order to get them to vote for them(or get in bed with the media and have them do it). The common person has no right to impact politics, he has no knowledge in it and is often misled and even then, his vote only choses which oligarchical party gets in power and maybe what social policies get enacted in order to appease the masses(such as gay marriage). Another issue with democracy is the short term nature of it, a democracy struggles in enacting long term plans. Long term plans don't win votes, a government elected now can't boast about the completion of a goal that is completed in 20 years, in fact his opposition may get that right. The other issue is the instability of it, even if the government did enact a long term plan, the head of sate generally has a fixed term anyway and his successor may not have the same views on the pan as he did, particularity if he comes form another party. Democracy also lacks the direct control over the nation that authoritarianisms does, often if a democratic government wants to change something the tools at their disposal are very limited. The last two reason are why China has been able to grow so rapidly, Chinese foreign and internal policy is often quite bad but they are able to create and complete long term goals and they are able to directly get the nation to follow the course they want it to(that and the limited tools, short term nature and oligarchical influence of the west limit their ability to combat it).
Authoritarianism(in a non-monarchist form) lacks many of the above but is still not ideal. It falls victim to much internal politics and the head of state is often not so much competent as well connected(democracy has this issue too). A good example would be the Nazi party, the successor to Hitler was planned to be Goering. Another issue is that they are not bred to rule, a monarch is raised from birth with the intention that he will be monarch, he learns that skillset through his whole life.
Often when a monarch was poor historically it was because he was not meant to be monarch. Which leads to another point. In the event of a poor monarch the sate and people have much more inclination to remove him, just look at the US. A vast mass of the nation hated the old President and now hates the new one, what are they going to do about it? Nothing. There is nothing they can do, they can only wait for the next election and hope to win, they are given the illusion of impact and therefore are content to do nothing. In a monarchy poor governance leads to direct intervention, either the nobles get together and force you to sign the Magna carta or the nobles and/or peasants have you removed and executed, the nation has more power in removing a poor monarch. Not only this but the health of the nation and the competence of the ruler directly impacts the ruler himself. If the nation prospers, he prospers. If the nation does poorly, he does poorly, it is his nation. Unlike in a democracy, if the Monarch is removed he can't just fly to Florida and relax in his mansion, if the monarch is removed he is likely to have his land confiscated along with his head removed.
|