Message from @Mr. Nessel
Discord ID: 675307501700513793
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 I’d say it would be virtually impossible to establish one in America considering the country’s 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
Basically Alexander's problem
What happens without an heir but very powerfull gnerals etc.
Being born into royalty makes you weak. Rome had the right idea, adopting sons who would be competent rulers
Of course antipater killed Alexander's son tho
I don't see how being born into royalty makes one weak. if anything it allows you to properly prepare for rule
No hardship. You have a cushy life.
Not necessarily
I think it also makes it harder to relate to the common folk
Lots of learning and bureaucracy to do
Sometimes people expect them to lead
Someone who was raised a commoner but is a genius, understands what it's like
Anyway, I think we can both agree that a dictatorship would be a step in the right direction. Even if we don't agree on the final end point
Yeah
The metaphysics must be right, thats the most important part
I think that if a king raises their child(ren) properly they grow up to be good rulers.
Just don’t let them live a cushy life and force them to do jobs considered as crappy.
Make their young childhood fun but make them struggle when they are teens and young adults so that they don’t become spoiled.
>a king
>their
fam...
What?
King are men
It’s HIS children
Don’t adopt leftist nonenglish
I was thinking of king AND Queen when I said the their bit.