Monarchy Forum
Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 4      Prev   1   2   3   4   Next
ContraTerrentumEQR

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,026
Reply with quote  #31 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jovan66102

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponocrates
The centralizing of decisions made in a Parliament takes away power and legitimacy from the individuals and corporate bodies that acted more in the local areas.   I think these decisions could have been made more informally between people, including the monarch, rather than formally through a Parliament.   Also, there would be more deference given to custom about the way things are handled rather than by acts of Parliament.     

The concentration of power in the modern bureaucracy of the 20th century was made possible by the traditional liberalism of the 19th - it legitimized the notion that a majority in the Parliament should be in charge and could build a large bureaucracy if they had the votes.

I think the Parliament would be ok if it's purpose was to only veto something proposed by the monarch or to offer advice.   It would only meet to deliberate on a specific matter and not stay in session year-round.


Again, well said, Sir!

Once again I agree.  Ponocrates, you seem to be describing the traditional constitution of the Kingdom of France.

__________________

PAX CHRISTI IN REGNO CHRISTI

Ponocrates

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,462
Reply with quote  #32 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContraTerrentumEQR
Once again I agree.  Ponocrates, you seem to be describing the traditional constitution of the Kingdom of France.


I've moved more decisively against liberal democracy and I do look to examples in pre-revolutionary France, but also to the Roman Empire, which is a bit different.   People in power are given more lee-way, but they also must be held accountable to behaving virtuously.   The modern project of liberal democracy is an attempt to institutionalize power in such a way that virtue does not need to be a consideration.   Someone coined the expression (was it Kant?) that we can have a system of limited government that accounts for the rule of devils.   No, I think its more a government ruled by the base and unworthy.  I believe that we are ultimately ruled by men, not by laws or institutions.  

__________________
"For every monarchy overthrown the sky becomes less brilliant, because it loses a star. A republic is ugliness set free." - Anatole France
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,968
Reply with quote  #33 
Tricameralism tends to play the devils against each other - a check on the massive increase in the power of the common devil is still left 'as an exercise for the reader'.

__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 4,463
Reply with quote  #34 
I submitted my article on monarchism to another site, awaiting approval. With modifications, I might be able to post it here
Jeannette

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 7
Reply with quote  #35 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CondeDeLara
I would like to see your opinion and why you prefer that form more. Find the pros and cons of it.  

I'm for absolute.
How do you solve the problem of a bad true/"absolute" monarch? What has always been the answer? You kill them. (Whether literally, socially, financially, or whatever, you have to kill them.) Traditionally, the replacement in that situation is supposed to be a new monarch, or even a new dynasty.
Republicans and Democrats mess up the order.
So do Loyalists.

A good monarch has no need of a counsel of advisors and no reason for anyone to be allowed to overrule their decisions. To have such things indicates a weak monarch, ready to be replaced.
In such a situation, those counselors are the very people who kill the monarch, and lead to the birth of a Republic in place of a new monarch.
Ponocrates

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,462
Reply with quote  #36 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeannette
A good monarch has no need of a counsel of advisors and no reason for anyone to be allowed to overrule their decisions. To have such things indicates a weak monarch, ready to be replaced.
In such a situation, those counselors are the very people who kill the monarch, and lead to the birth of a Republic in place of a new monarch.


Jeannette, all absolute monarchs have used advisers, or a privy council.  It's even better when he has the support and input from other nobles and the leaders of corporate bodies in his realm.   The parliamentary system tries to formalize these relationships with the monarch.   When they are not formalized, we call it "absolute monarchy," but those relationships and checks still exist and he usually tries to reach a consensus with them. 

__________________
"For every monarchy overthrown the sky becomes less brilliant, because it loses a star. A republic is ugliness set free." - Anatole France
panafricanforum

Registered:
Posts: 334
Reply with quote  #37 

I believe in a constitutional monarchy, but the powers should be shared 50/50.  There should be limits on any leader of any political ideology.  In the case of and constitutional monarchy, I believe the monarch should share power with the elected government.  There should be guide lines in how the power is shared between the monarch, and the elected government parliament.  I do not believe that and constitutional monarchy should follow the guide lines of and figure head monarch.  The monarch should be allow to exercise political power, and not beholden to figure head status.


__________________
I am for the restoration of the Ethiopian monarchy.
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,968
Reply with quote  #38 
Three 'estates' each with Veto regarding changing the Laws.
Taxation originating in the Commons, requiring triple consent.

Executive in the hands of the Monarch.



__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
Jeannette

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 7
Reply with quote  #39 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponocrates
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeannette
A good monarch has no need of a counsel of advisors and no reason for anyone to be allowed to overrule their decisions. To have such things indicates a weak monarch, ready to be replaced.
In such a situation, those counselors are the very people who kill the monarch, and lead to the birth of a Republic in place of a new monarch.


Jeannette, all absolute monarchs have used advisers, or a privy council.  It's even better when he has the support and input from other nobles and the leaders of corporate bodies in his realm.   The parliamentary system tries to formalize these relationships with the monarch.   When they are not formalized, we call it "absolute monarchy," but those relationships and checks still exist and he usually tries to reach a consensus with them. 

The problem with your first sentence is that you have said it as an absolute truth, for which there can be no exception throughout time and the universe (whether forward, present, or backward). One exception will render the statement false. Now, seeing as there is no proof for the statement, nor none I personally know of at this time against it (due to the fact I am not a historian), it becomes a matter of belief. To run around stating such beliefs becomes a matter of preaching, and oficially puts it into the category of religion. But, you see, I already stated that I know that a good ruler has no need for such a thing, and for that I believe that the precense of such things is the marker of an unfit ruler who must be closely watched, tied up, and gagged to keep them from getting themselves replaced. (And, if they can't quell the fear of such in their subjects, it's probably true, there throne is on the line.) No amount of preaching to me about what you personally believe will erase knowledge from my head. You can have fun getting your beliefs off your chest, but it won't affect me.

I stated a fact. A good ruler doesn't need it. You countered with a belief. There is no argument past this point. You have no foothold.

EDIT: P.S. - This is what it means to be absolute. I have no need of advise in regard to most things in life. I'm here to meet other Monarchists, not to be told what to think or do.
Ponocrates

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,462
Reply with quote  #40 
Jeannette, provide a counter-example to what I said about an absolute monarch needing advisers, otherwise you are providing a definition, not a fact, that has no basis in reality and you are the one succumbing to belief.  

Perhaps you mean, the absolute ruler, like any good ruler, can make his own judgment about things.   In that case, I agree with you.   However, I would  still insist that he uses advisers.

Also, if you look at many threads, there are discussions and disagreements, which may not convince one to change one's position, but hopefully would clarify one's own.   We agreed with each other in one thread, and on this one we differed about the meaning of an "absolute monarch."   Isn't that the nature of exchange in forums like this?   

__________________
"For every monarchy overthrown the sky becomes less brilliant, because it loses a star. A republic is ugliness set free." - Anatole France
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,968
Reply with quote  #41 
I'd go to scripture, were the wisest King in earth said that counselors were needful as a 'proof'.

I'd go with the fact that any man who thinks he has the wisdom to 'do it right' on every matter is a fool or insane, and in neither case should he reign unrestrained as another 'proof'.

I'd go with the fact that in the recorded history of the world no successful King as tried to govern without counselors as a 'third proof'.

See, its unwise, insane, and untried.  Ought not do it.


__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,968
Reply with quote  #42 
I'd go to scripture, were the wisest King in earth said that counselors were needful as a 'proof'.

I'd go with the fact that any man who thinks he has the wisdom to 'do it right' on every matter is a fool or insane, and in neither case should he reign unrestrained as another 'proof'.

I'd go with the fact that in the recorded history of the world no successful King as tried to govern without counselors as a 'third proof'.

See, its unwise, insane, and untried.  Ought not do it.


__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
Ponocrates

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,462
Reply with quote  #43 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron
in the recorded history of the world no successful King as tried to govern without counselors


I would be surprised if there are even any unsuccessful kings who governed without counselors.   I don't think it ever happens.   Perhaps, there is a regime that pretends the monarch is a genius and does everything himself, but that's different from what happens behind the scenes.  

__________________
"For every monarchy overthrown the sky becomes less brilliant, because it loses a star. A republic is ugliness set free." - Anatole France
KYMonarchist

Registered:
Posts: 4,853
Reply with quote  #44 
In SimCity2000, you play the mayor of a city. Thanks to the limitations of computer games, you are effectively an absolute monarch, the computer not being able to defy you. You have advisors to advise you of things. You don't have to listen to them, and can make all decisions on your own, but it's generally a good idea to listen to the advisors, since they know what they're talking about.
__________________
"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,968
Reply with quote  #45 
Ponocrates,
I can imagine a Kim sick song type doing the 'without counsellors' bit....

__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.