[ b ] [ int ] [ sp ] [ jp ] [ d ] [ vg ] [ Feed ] [ Mod ]

/int/ - /Int/eresting

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Verification
Flag
File
:
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

File: 1491943432548.png (2.21 KB, 600x300, 600px-Flag_of_Russia_1991-….png)

 No.1273

Flag of your country when she was on top of democracy.

On the picture the flag of Russia 1991-1993.

 No.1274

File: 1491947384848.jpg (41.95 KB, 1191x797, poni.jpg)


 No.1277

I hate democracy.

 No.1279

File: 1491958416958.gif (140.56 KB, 300x300, melonpandance.gif)


 No.1282

File: 1491963581002.jpg (112.97 KB, 888x1464, Youmu 010.jpg)

>>1279
Because the common people are stupid and ignorant, in many ways this is expected too, why should the farrier bother with politics? he won't. The common man is also easily manipulated by the network and so are women, women should not even be able to vote. Politicians are always out to sabotage each other regardless of the effect it has on the nation too, they are in it for themselves and they also don't do what is best for the nation but what will make the foolish masses happy and keep them in office.

Absolute monarchy is the best system of government.

 No.1284

File: 1491965989311.jpg (522 KB, 1456x1046, ME_THE_DOG.jpg)

>>1282
Democracy is a response to absolute monarchy. Is the same true the other way around? People getting tired of the delays of democracy change to monarchy?

The thing about monarchy though is that you need something to distinguish the rulers from the rest. Some divine connection or primo genetics or something.

Yeah that could be ok. But wouldn't it suck balls if you were ordered to be cannon fodder?

 No.1285

File: 1491967120085.jpg (134.78 KB, 820x1204, Miho, Maho and Erika 003.jpg)

>>1284
Democracy is a response to either a poor ruler or the country being in a poor situation regardless of the ruler, it is a movement by the people but the people are unlikely to form a movement of the people to get rid of an existing movement of the people, particularly in these times when they are indoctrinated to believe democracy is good, they are soft, technology makes it much easier to crack down on and the military have equipment far surpassing anything the people could ever get. Democracy also gives the illusion of the possibility of change, most parties are very similar and voting in another still keeps the flawed system of democracy anyway but people still believe that if this government is not so good we can wait four years and vote in another one, monarchy is not like that, if there are problems with it you have to act, this also holds monarchies to be more accountable.

That helps but you just need somebody to seize control, they do need to make a legacy though but seizing control of the state is enough to do that on its own.

Those were a part of the times not the government, plenty of other governments could and did do the same.

 No.1286

>>1285
To expand on that last point, monarchies varied greatly depending on the age and culture but most western monarchies for example did not force people to be cannon fodder. They made armies from volunteers weather they be knights, men at arms, professional soldier or people looking for money. The people were expected in places to provide arms for themselves bu this is to defend there nation not to be send out as cannon fodder, most of the time as I said monarchies varied greatly by there times and culture, it had nothing to do with government itself. Conscription as we know it was actually invented by a democratic government. The French created it to make large armies during Napoleons time, other nations like Prussia and Britain relied on volunteer armies(Prussia did however introduce conscription after it lost to the french and had to make a massive army to fight Frances massive army).

 No.1287

>>1286
Ohh and it was introduced by the French Republic not Napoleons government, that was something different, but then I am not sure if the French First Republic was a democracy but it was a movement of the people none the less.

 No.1288

File: 1491971467867.png (64.82 KB, 2000x1000, Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.png)


 No.1291

File: 1491976540767.png (112.53 KB, 2000x1200, 87349059056889.png)

National Socialist German Workers Party (including blank votes) Votes: 44,462,458 98.80% 741 Seats
98% approval rate, referendums, only germans allowed to vote, best Democracy ever. 1933-1945

 No.1295

>datamine yourself goy
No.

 No.1314

File: 1492018423874.png (70.93 KB, 592x554, 1448260103003.png)

>>1277
>>1279
>>1282
Democracy's theoretical purpose is to prevent the abuse of individual rights by unrestricted autocrats - for which history has too many precedents - but, in its current Western form, all it does is encourage the infringement of individual rights rather than prevent it, because it's seen as an end in itself rather than as a means to an end. To make matters worse, the mechanisms it has to prevent abuse -slowing and spreading the decision process- also make it impossible or very hard to reform once corrupt, and the alternative -violent revolution- has too many risks.

Ironically, the first example to come to mind when one thinks of modern democracies - Republican France - was from its very beginning probably worse than the preceding Ancien Régime. As noted in >>1287, French Republicans created conscription as we know it; they also introduced to Western modernity hypercentralization, ethno-linguistic repression, mass political violence (see the Terror and the Vendée war) did you know Basque culture had far more freedom under Louis XVI than under Robespierre? did you know the Third French Republic brutally repressed minority languages in schools in the name of "Liberty Equality Fraternity"? and other wonderful things.

Three other things to consider:
>18th century absolute monarchs, due to limitations of technology, had less power over their subjects than modern democratic states do
>The 20th and 21th centuries' genocidal despots (see >>1288, >>1291) almost invariably used promises of sweeping social change and the "we represent the masses" rhetoric to justify their cruelty. True reactionaries in that century were relatively merciful compared to these angels of change of revolution.
>The Ancien Regime evolved organically over centuries of struggle between the King, the nobility and other groups, containing a patchwork of local institutions and laws; parts of it had a higher level of autonomy because they weren't even considered part of the de jure Kingdom of France! The First French Republic, on the other hand centralized all power to radically transform society according to the artificial projects of an enlightened elite. This distinction between organic and artificial regimes is important.

While, much unlike most people, I despise the French revolutionary ideal of democracy, there's a democratic model I admire - the Anglo-American one, developed organically out of centuries of struggle between the King, the gentry, the bourgeoise, the aristocracy etc. (are you beginning to see a pattern?) which recognizes that limitations to democratic impulse are just as important as limitations to the leader's power. This tradition gave us Victorian Britain, Rhodesia, early America, etc. but just as British liberalism was abandoned, never to return, in favor of central planning in the 20th century, so did the Anglo-American democratic tradition go through so much change that, in the current year, it is indistinguishable from the more common kind of democracy, and perhaps that's inevitable with that kind of system - the franchise expands, welfare is established, freedoms are curtailed, judges are corrupted, and soon the system's virtues are over.

I have read some absolutist political theory and heard of the arguments in favor of absolute monarchy -that it forces rulers to think in the long run, that as long as there's it's very clear who's de facto ruler there'll be more efficient governance, that even an absolute ruler has rational reasons to be benevolent, etc. and they leave me open to the possibility, but not enough to be enthusiastic about it. On the other hand, I've been indoctrinated since birth about the virtues of republican democracy, yet I see its decadence all around me. So which is the ideal system of government? I don't know, I have to read more political theory to have a clearer picture.

 No.1333

File: 1492038697630.jpg (104.41 KB, 3072x1536, honduras.jpg)

Our natinal anthem is heavily influenced by Russia.

 No.1494

File: 1492210380265.png (5.04 KB, 1200x720, red flag.png)

18 march 1871 - 28 may 1871

 No.1573

>>1494
Legitimiste counterrevolution when?

 No.1612

>>1277
I hate democracy also.



[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ b ] [ int ] [ sp ] [ jp ] [ d ] [ vg ] [ Feed ] [ Mod ]