04-04-2006, 03:23 PM | #161 | |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Quote:
O.o
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
|
04-04-2006, 03:26 PM | #162 | |||
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
|||
04-04-2006, 03:28 PM | #163 | |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Quote:
Very good post, sun-star. But...Christ the King? Aren't we mixing religion and politics?
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
|
04-04-2006, 03:32 PM | #164 | |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Quote:
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
|
04-04-2006, 04:23 PM | #165 |
of the House of Fëanor
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,150
|
Listen, strange women lyin' n ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not some farcical aquatic ceremony. You can't expect to weild supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you. If I went 'round saying I was Emperor, just because some moistened bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!
__________________
Few people have the imagination for reality.
~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe |
04-04-2006, 05:26 PM | #166 |
Death of Mooters and [Entmoot] Internal Affairs
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 2,870
|
Can you see the violence inherent in the system?! Can you see the violence inherent in the system?!
__________________
Fëanor - Innocence incarnated Still, Aikanáro 'till the Last battle. |
04-04-2006, 05:32 PM | #167 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
(great Python quotes!!! "watery tart" )
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç å ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
04-04-2006, 05:38 PM | #168 | |
The Chocoholic Sea Elf Administrator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: N?n in Eilph (Belgium)
Posts: 14,363
|
Quote:
__________________
We are not things. |
|
04-05-2006, 12:23 AM | #169 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
So, in practice modern constitutional monarchies are more or less ceremonial monarchies?
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
04-05-2006, 03:25 AM | #170 |
The Chocoholic Sea Elf Administrator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: N?n in Eilph (Belgium)
Posts: 14,363
|
Not necessarily. I take it every monarchy is somewhat different due to historical facts, where the monarch kept different rights or powers. But frankly I have to admit this is beyond my point of knowledge.
__________________
We are not things. |
04-05-2006, 03:57 AM | #171 |
Word Santa Claus
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,922
|
Hmmm... I think Gwaimir is setting up a nice straw man here - a democracy, proper, means every citizen votes on everything (see - ancient Athens), not the American form of government, which is technically a republic.
Democracy sucks, in my opinion. With over a few hundred people it gets completely unwieldy and absurd. Representative democracy (aka a republic) on the other hand, is quite good. While the majority may be "self-serving" that means that the majority is getting served. This is soooo far from the case in a monarchy* as to be laughable. * I mean here an absolute or at least unitary monarchy. That is, not a consitutional one like most of Europe has now where the real heavy lifting and governing and such is done by an elected body. Those are basically republics in terms of their legislative branches, even if they are monarchies in terms of their executives. The problem with a supreme monarchy that incorporates both legislative and executive into one is that there is too much need for a single person, and one that is not replaceable* who has to be good. Whereas in a system with an elected legislature, there is a higher chance of response to the needs of the people, and a chance to get out of office those who are not good. *Kings aren't replaceable. You don't get to vote them out of office. You can rebel, but then it is the whole system you are attacking. Also, it should be noted that even if the single person in charge of executive & legislative is elected, there is still way too much potential for abuse of that combined power. Much better to have checks & balances.
__________________
Sufficient to have stood, yet free to fall. |
04-05-2006, 02:25 PM | #172 | |||||
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I disagree that an elected legistlature gives a higher chance of response to the needs of the people. It gives a higher chance of response to the WANTS of the people, which are rarely the same as their needs. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
|||||
04-05-2006, 02:44 PM | #173 |
Word Santa Claus
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,922
|
A monarchy places far too much trust in the person of the monarch. In a deliberative body, there is an institutional control requiring some discussion and some acknowledgement of differing views (perhaps not as much as we would like, but more than if a king simply says "I want to do that"). There is no such institutional check on a monarchy.
If the majority is self-serving, in a republic, on each issue the majority on that issue will be served. If person X and person Y want opposite things, they do not make the same majority. The greatest problem with a monarchy is that it conflates the legislative and executive branches. These should be separated because having one person or even one body both carry out the law and decide what the law is lends itself marvellously well to abuse. Having a single person legislature, even if not conflated with the executive, is still more problematic than a deliberative body because the issue of arbitrary power is much more of a problem in a single person because they don't need anyone else to go along with them to enact something. Besides, I frankly trust the majority to vote for representatives who, well, represent them on the issues - and thus do the best for them - better than I trust some single person to do the best for them out of the goodness of his or her heart.
__________________
Sufficient to have stood, yet free to fall. |
04-05-2006, 04:35 PM | #174 | |||||
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Quote:
Quote:
Anyway, I don't think, again, that the majority being served is a good thing. See below, and previous post for that matter. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
|||||
04-05-2006, 07:04 PM | #175 |
Word Santa Claus
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,922
|
I say you're assuming the best about monarchy and the worst about a republic. You are assuming that the majority will not vote for what they need, while assuming that some single person serving as monarch will supply them with what they need without any trouble. The first assumption is far worse than history shows us; the second is far better.
Also, I think hearing even two views (say Dems and Republicans) is much better than only one. And majorities are not fixed, unlike a single person. In a completely simple case (say five representatives, ABCDE) we might have majority ABC on one issue and ABD on another, and CDE on a third. So the statement that "The same thing [ie the probability of dictatorship] is true of a deliberative body with a majority of one party large enough to pass measures" is not as true because the majority need not be stable.
__________________
Sufficient to have stood, yet free to fall. |
04-05-2006, 09:10 PM | #176 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Where those two assumptions you say I make come from is one simple view that is: People are as a rule (though not one without exception) selfish, greedy, and foolish but can be trained to be more responsible and imbued with a sense that their duties are higher than them.
Based on this principle, I think it a bad idea to be ruled by people in general. However, they can be imbued with a sense of responsibility, and a feeling that their duties are higher than their desires, and even their wants. This will not happen with the majority of people; however, it seems to me likely that it Since it is more realistic to assume this happens with someone who is expected from birth to be the heir or a very real candidate for the throne. I very much disagree that the assumptions are respectively better and worse than history shows. There are examples on both sides of bad, and I suppose good, but the numbers of republics/democracies vs. monarchies is so disproportioned that one cannot realistically play 'tit for tat' and expect it to be an accurate representation of the way of things. Hearing two views can be better than one, indeed, though I'm not certain it always is. But I tend to think it is as a rule, so I'm in favour of kings having advisors, preferably on a relatively large scale, so there again you have more than one view being heard. I could be mistaken, but I thought you were defending the American republic, in which case ABCDE is not a good representation. While of course it's not always true, as a general rule Republicans tend to vote along similar lines, and Democrats tend to vote along similar lines, so that if you have a very large majority of either, they need not give much regard to the views of the other.
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
04-05-2006, 09:17 PM | #177 | |
Word Santa Claus
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,922
|
I'm defending the system of the American republic, not the way it currently runs. Just as I assume when you defend monarchy, you aren't willing to have Richard III stand in for you.
Again, when you say Quote:
As for history, there may be more monarchies than democracies or republics, but percentages would still hold besides which, I think even if you were to say that republics and democracies were relatively untried, monarchy can be shown to generally yield some pretty awful results...on average.
__________________
Sufficient to have stood, yet free to fall. |
|
04-05-2006, 09:35 PM | #178 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
So then both of us are defending things which no longer practically speaking exist?
Monarchy does yield some pretty awful results, as you say, but not on average, I think, whereas the Athenian democracy was, as you mentioned earlier, a flop, and I don't consider modern republican or democratic government to be all that great either. I think that monarchy as a rule has a better track record than more popular forms of government. a1) On the grounds that I stated that they would trained to consider "their duties to be higher than they" (or grammatically ought to have ), who else would fit, but a ruler? What other office can be said more or less universally to be more important than the holder of that office? a2) It seems that no office would be better suited than kingship to being prepared to have their future holders formed in such a way, and that it is far more likely, especially as only with some sort of hereditary line can one know what office one will hold. b) On the grounds of his being imbued the aforementioned senses, or on the presumption that he is not also trained in statecraft? If making him a virtuous man be attempted, it seems unlikely that he will be untrained in the niceties of ruling. c) They can, but they can't be expected to. In fact, it seems that as regards the last, even if they produce results which are right, they cannot be considered to be anything but foolish, if those who choose them are foolish.
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle Last edited by Gwaimir Windgem : 04-05-2006 at 09:36 PM. |
04-07-2006, 03:14 PM | #179 | |
An enigma in a conundrum
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,476
|
Quote:
or move to a monarchy and "off with your head".
__________________
Vizzini: "HE DIDN'T FALL?! INCONCEIVABLE!!" Inigo: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." |
|
04-07-2006, 05:12 PM | #180 |
Word Santa Claus
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,922
|
USA isn't a democracy either, Spock. Or did you personally vote on the last budget bill Congress passed?
__________________
Sufficient to have stood, yet free to fall. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
State Funding of Political Parties | The Gaffer | General Messages | 15 | 09-06-2006 10:49 AM |
Philosophy | Millane | General Messages | 321 | 05-07-2006 05:29 PM |
Polictical Correctness | afro-elf | General Messages | 392 | 12-23-2004 12:15 PM |
Nation States - The Great Continent of Entmoot | jerseydevil | Entmoot Archive | 323 | 06-17-2004 11:27 AM |
The ban on political discussion is lifted | Sister Golden Hair | General Messages | 0 | 06-16-2004 03:26 PM |