The New York Times: Elections Are Bad for Democracy
(web.archive.org)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (50)
sorted by:
The worst part about monarchism is that normal people are left with nothing but a patron they hope will protect them, and only does so if they are a great king.
If you get a bad one, you're stuck with that unfathomably bad one for centuries. Not just one generation of a bad king, but a bad king leads to more bad kings, and ruins the kingdom. You end up getting this 4th turning cycle among the elites that goes: Good king for 40 years, followed by "Meh" king for 40 years, followed by bad kings for 120 years, followed by a good king for 40 years.
We have that now, except the monarchs aren't publicly visible, so no one knows where to stage the peasant's revolt and who to stick in the choppy boi.
You don't have that, and you never have. As I said to CptLightning, even our shitty republican system has accountability where monarchism has none. Our aristocracies do change, and are even being challenged. Political change and accountability does and has existed to varying degrees. Feedback to rulers exists, where in a bad monarchy, it literally never does.
And that's different from our current system how? "Just vote out the bad politicians bro"? We've had generations of bad political rulers under a so-called repubilc
Tell me you've never read the experiences of people living under monarchy without telling me.
We've had political rulers you don't like. They've changed significantly over time, and their effects are limited. You have never, in your life, lived under the whims of an inbred idiot for 40 years of absolute rule. You don't know anyone who does (unless they lived in North Korea).
There is, actually, more accountability in our republican systems (shitty though they may be) than anything a monarchy would condemn us with. I literally did vote to change my state constitution after our state SC made a bad ruling. Even under the federal system, that single court case would have been precedent for 40 years. Now imagine that level of precedents, but for all policies, with no capacity for literally anyone to influence any policy or position for 1,000 miles in any direction. That's monarchism, and it's why we shot people to stop it.