Message from @Vulpes
Discord ID: 675293222427164673
write in your own answer if you're conflicted
@Foxen (The Centurion) i don't want congress doing anything so i support term limits
Too late I've already submitted it.
it ok they wont listen anyways
One of the problems with the incentives of Congressmen in general are that they are essentially child kings that are largely incapable of ruling without many corrupt advisors
Theyβre also incentivized to loot other regions and bring back pork for their constituents
Term limits ensure that they canβt understand the game too well (Mitch McConnell) so they donβt do too much damage
However, theyβre less capable of creating good, long-term policy
@clossington i'm still waiting for the nojoo policy
How about a term limit of 0 days
And abolishing term limits of the presidency
Making presidency a lifelong thing
And also making it hereditary
and then what if the king dies and the successor is a psychopath?
Rarely ever happens
Bruh, that is the most basic bitch anti-monarchy statment
And if it does those tend to be put into a regency
Or dethroned
Nobody, even in a monarchy, rules alone
Only the mad and "great kings" get in the history books. Most of them were neither
Also now we have knowledge of genetics and royals can avoid having as many bad apples in their families by better selecting who they marry
The understanding should be that there can't be a compromise in the quality of royalty
Genetics isn't even needed for this. In the olden times people knew about proper breeding
What happened historically is that diplomacy resulted in all sorts of bad marriages
so weve already established a king can be dethroned, then essentialy what youre advocating is an oligarchy of the people who can dethrone a king they dont see as fit
what im wondering is how you make sure the king controls the lords and corporations and not the other way around
No it's just it becomes pretty obvious in most cases when a ruler turns insane
That's far from an oligarchy
Which you can see in say Qing China or Japan throughout most of its history where the real power usually rested with the regents
It's up to a king to figure out how to effectively enforce his rule
Monarchy is an interesting idea, but Iβd say it would be virtually impossible to establish one in America considering the countryβs history
It'd still be better than liberal democracy though
It'd be hard to do/envision in any western country but this is making the mistake of assuming you'd just try to restore old monarchy rather than go say the Bonapartist route
It's pretty easy to draw a line from democracy to dictatorship
And from dictatorship to hereditary rule
Some theoretical framework is still required but I'd think you could use the Chinese concept of the mandate of heaven to legitimize it in the longterm
Also parts of America are less in line with the Anglo mindset
I think a dictatorship would probably solve all your problems, so I don't see why there would need to be a transition into monarchy
But yeah, it'd definitely be easier to go from dictatorship to monarchy than try to transition straight from democracy to monarchy
If dictatorships don't have clear lines of succession it causes all sorts of issues in the longterm