Message from @
Discord ID: 509916474052182066
Democracy just sounds really stupid to support. It's just people saying "Yay, the people I hate could gain power and I love this system because muh freedumz".
limited suffrage democracy *might* work in a culturally and racially homogenous society
How about a legislative body composed of nobility and clergy with one strong leader who gains power by divine righ-wait that sounds like pre French Revolution monarchy
Mozalbete is right tbh, heredity does sound best
However, in a society as adamantly anti monarchist as the US, I would prefer a republic with a hereditary ruling class
The best system of monarchy is hereditary, but the monarch can choose someone from outside of the family to be his heir if he thinks they would be better.
Yeah or an elective monarchy that selects one the previous monarch's sons
i believe in for-life high power executive position
That's pretty much how most Germanic monarchies operated at first, anyways
You shouldn't give any power to anyone below the monarch or clergy because if you give the people even an inch, they will keep taking more.
You have a point there @de ton, nobles did have a tendency to weaken the kingdom
How about a fascism-level of contentrated power along with militarism combined with a monarchy and some nobility?
No, the Church can deal with local/provincial government.
East Asian societies did nobility well in the sense that in order to maintain noble status every generation of nobles had to be military officers or civil servants
If you ceased to be useful to the realm you became a commoner, pretty much
That still gives too much power to too many people.
So no nobility?
Church and Monarch
Have only monarch+royals, then clergy, then everyone else is a commoner?
Yes
What about royals who are not immediate family of the monarch?
Landowners are the bosses of the peasants who work their land.
Would landowners be given any special privilege or should they be content with at least having their wealth
Non-immediate family royals are still royals.
What about granting noble titles but only to royals who are too far down the line of succession? Such as duchies or counties?
Those close enough to the monarch in line of succession being princes
No, the only noble titles would only be titular and mean nothing more than status.
So you are ok with granting noble titles to men of extraordinary service and prestige but with no added political privilege
And perhaps to large landowners
Yes
Ah, ok
No disagreements here then
I do believe having more officials in government other than monarch is necessary, however, it should be clear that they serve the monarch and thus can be removed from power as easily as they are appointed
This is probably where clergy or close members of the royal family should come in
I've been saying that's where the clergy comes in.
Limited suffrage democracy gated by Service and vetting by the Church
I don't believe in democracy period.
Theocracy is also terrible, though.
Theocratic monarchy is great though
King/emperor + state religion