*Doesn't have an issue with democratic representatives in government as long as they have no actual power*

having a 2nd alternative authority in event of elected govt. failing and being unable to govern is not a bad thing

thats called having a re-election

also @Bookworm , he centralized all power in his hands

what makes that a collective exactly?

its called a fringe and rare event.

nah, most Parliamentary Countries have a President or a "Monarch" type position

that's the person who rules at times of Governmental Crisis

or Prime Minister

that's the elected head

So, centralizing power is not leftist if it is done by an individual?

how is that different from a president elected?

well, an individual isn't "the government" 😄

A king, by his nature, *is* the government.

there's no President elected in a Parliamentary System right?

"Le etat, ce moi."

The state, that is me.

a king rules the government

Kingdom is a King's private property

"E pluribus unum"
One out of Many

quotes don't twist reality

so a Monarchy is technically the most Libertarian form of govt

for the monarch, sure 😛

sounds like you dont understand that there are multiple forms of Monarchy and only accept a single and outdated (by about 400 years) concept of direct rule (whether framed in the terms divine or outright naked force)

Right, except monarchical philosophies of governance do not recognize the will of the governed as the source of their authority.

Rather, the authority of government flows *from* them.

as is appropriate

explains why they cut off the heads of the authority they were displeased with

And, usually, they receive that authority from some divine entity, or are themselves claimed to be divine.

Our current elite hate Populism as well

Well, wasn't him. Was his grandson.

the authority of the government is granted by the people,

If the people think the government should be replaced, they'll either vote it out, or force it out

The issue I see with an elected head of state, or appointed, is that any issue that causes an elected govt to fail would also be a factor on the authority of the head of state .. I.E. the head of state would be a partisan position and authority. With a constitutional monarchy where parliament is the highest authority where it stays within the constitution you avoid that.

Discontent and rebellion is not authority, merely force.

Force does not bestow legitimacy.

and what do people vote for?

immediate gratification

that's what

the bolsheviks disagree

there is no long term vision in a democratic govt

the wh..oh, right.. the ones who ruled for a few months before Lenin and Stalin got rid of them ? ;P

rebellion is taking your support away to the point where you give your support to a new faction

And through the might of the revolutionaries, the sovereignty of the new faction is made to claim the previous rulers