Hmm

So you're saying that the monarchy did not in fact fail when the monarch took leave of his senses?
:3

Actually, he lived under one for three years.

As an infant.

>Monarchy vs Democracy
false dichotomy
>For a monarchy to work...
lots of things need to happen actually
>one man must be wise
says who? Do kings not employ a bureaucracy?
>For deomcracy to work...
lots of things have to happen actually
>...must be wise
says who?

He hated that monarchy, though

I'm not worried about how wise they are, I'm worried about their motives.

>monarchy is tryannical dictatorship

>democracy is mob rule

the monarchy worked best when the monarch didn't rule it

So monarchists believe in putting every last egg in one basket?

>People still fall Monarchical propaganda

Oh how comfortable you are in your lives.

My kind of monarchy

Well, it is. The only actual democracy is mob rule. The representative system we have now is not democracy, it's a charade with influential oligarchy pulling the strings behind the curtain and having retards believe they actually rule by having them engage in a political equivalent of American Idol every 4 years. My argument for monarchy or even an aristocratic republic is that it at least recognizes this as an integral part of human nature and codifies it into its framework, instead of having unaccountable, hidden elites ruling the system secretly.

>Using Charles Maurras for your lowly anglo saxon alt right shitty memes.
Holy shit kys you cucks, Maurras is a pure girl, leave him alone.

>For monarchy to work one specific man who jumped out of one specific vagina must be wise

You could argue that democracy simply relies on at least 50% of all people born are wise. Whereas monarchy is a crapshoot with 20% chance of madness receiving absolute power.

...

Really rouses the mind...

Dictatorships or monarchies for that matter are never efficient because they can only keep the status quo through authority, and that authority cannot be gained and maintained by a single man - a ruler needs his military commanders, his media men, his administrators, etc

So in reality in a overly centralized regime the ruler spends most of his time and effort pandering to his ruling elite which in turn enforces his authority. That's why modern dictators generally style themselves as generalissimos and give generous privileges to his generals.
That's also why dictatorships are shit at getting things done, most of the energy is allocated in keeping local elites happy

DESU that is a sign of everybody going mad

hm

Maurras is /myboy/, manant

How about being ruled by no one?

Popular mandate is a much better way to choose a ruler than blind chance.

54% of voters expressly voted against him

Neither, and instead have a republic like the USA.

That's a good way for society to descend back into the caveman days

Glass eventually, somebody will Garner enough support resources and Power in order to proclaimed himself leader over a few, and then they will want to expand naturally to conquer more and more and more people and it'll just be reset of all of human civilization all over again.

There's no way to win.

If the Monarch if essentially randomly selected via some combination of war, intrigue, and heredity (as they all were in practice in the old days) neither is more likely than the other,

Monarchy=tyranny of the King
Democracy=tyranny of the idiotic masses

A constitutional republic is the only way to protect liberties.

>king = tyrant
Spotted the Ameriblob

muh picturesque monarch will never abuse his powers!

not rly

>muh constitooshon
>muh being ruled by a Jewish oligarchy

oh boy here we go

jesus christ, this is like int before the flags

Thanks for correcting the record

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds

Actually, the crowd is smarter. Look at the way markets work. A vast number of people with individually limited information are able to pool that information to come up with efficient prices.

Also, the meme is fucking retarded. Monarchy doesn't work best when it relies on a genius at the top. Monarchy works best when the monarch's personal influence is limited, and functions of state performed by people who actually know what they are doing.

>everyone is going to blindly follow the king once a monarchy is established

Yeah, that's how it works.

The incentives at work in the marketplace are totally different from the ones at work in politics

the even bigger mistake is thinking that a king rules alone, instead of merely being the chief oligarch

Very sound argument IF you can explain the process that selects a monarch, and how it works to find the wise ones.

How so?

>markets: profit based incentives
>politics: profit based incentives

If an individual consumer spending their own money makes decisions based on irrational biases or false information they will bear the costs of that decision by ending up with shoddy products they don't like, thus encouraging wise decision making. But as a voter that same person can indulge any manner of false belief by voting for politicians who support them
and pay no price whatsoever as their individual vote has almost no effect on the outcome.

>HNNNG PFAFAOWL
What did he mean by this?

>and pay no price whatsoever as their individual vote has almost no effect on the outcome.

Wrong, only those with vested interests vote in the first place, that's why less than half the country votes. Voting is intentionally annoying, the fact that it takes place on a workday means that working people are discouraged from voting, and a day or a partial day's labor does indeed have a quantifiable monetary cost.

How about this:

For a monarchy to catastrophically fail, one man must fail.
For a democracy to catastrophically fail, the majority of the people must fail.

Which is more likely?

okay you're in chomsky land have a nice day

Unlike Chomsky I'm actually defending the US system, which was the best governed western country for at least several centuries. He also disrespects our alma mater which I also don't like.

Do monarchists really exist? I thought people were just larping.

Nice quote, now notice its devoid of any evidence

>Do monarchists really exist? I thought people were just larping.
Some people are predisposed to be servile.

It's easy, it frees you of responsibility to give up your autonomy.

Doesn't that show that monarchy is better? A true revolutionary hops onto the scene and only 46% vote to eliminate the rotting system.

>the majority of the people must fail

but user listen

this is already true

>I'm American: the post

Saudi-Arabia.

>he thinks representative democracy is oligarchy because of youtube conspiracy theory videos

>implying it isn't
So are you saying Bush or Obama were fundamentally more devoted to their constituents and voters rather than their corporate donors? How come the Obama administration was pushing for things like TPP then? How come Merkel is pushing for the migrant invasion of Germany when the only people that are gonna profit from it are industrial megacorps who want to devalue the cost of labor?

Exactly. The two political parties are fundamentally not interested in the people. The system is flawed, it's true. Perhaps a representative monarchy or some sort of administrative aristocracy is preferred.

Or socialism. There are various forms of socialism which are very beneficial for the participants. The only forms of socialism I see mentioned on here are market socialism and communism, which both suck.

US government is more than the office of POTUS, but to be fair you have a point.

>implying TTP and increased immigration are bad things for the general population.

they're under the foolish notion that if they lived under an autocrat he would do exactly what they wanted

Go to bed Hillary

Low energy bait

Unlike meme states in Europe or East Asia, the US isn't facing an imminent demographic crunch that requires an immediate influx of foreigners.

but it also isn't harmed by them either

Like most arguments against the TPP, these posts are devoid of facts, arguments or any decent analysis.

>offer zero facts, arguments or analysis yourself
>get butthurt when people do the same in response

"I can't call soneone a benevolent dictator if the benevolence of his government relies on him living forever"
-some dude on the internet

Reddit: the post

Cutting tariffs is inherently bad for workers, especially if the capitalists can find cheap labor elsewhere, it's not good for the Chinese children to get their hands crushed by textile machines and it's not good for the American middle class to become poor. The latter is why Donald Trump won.

Gaia: the post

damn

So tell me, what happens if the king is a tyrant, and teaches his son to be a tyrant, who then teaches his son to be a tyrant, etc

They put cucks like you on a spike I guess.

Cutting tariffs is good for the 'workers' because it allows them to increase their productivity with cheaper foreign goods. It's also good for foreign workers as it gives them increased employment and more opportunities.

>their individual vote has almost no effect on the outcome.

I'll admit gerrymandering is real.

You're forgetting one important fact. Voters do have an extremely weighty decision point when they plan to reside in a location, especially when buying property.

A voter who chooses comfort and security by residing in a secure voting bloc has already calculated and is OK with his representational value going to the candidate of his favored party. He has already voted with his feet, since he already know the outcome his actual physical vote has no meaning. And because he has potentially put six or seven figures into this decision, he better be damn sure it's a good one.

tl;dr people aren't stupid, if they move to an area that heavily favors one party, they would already have known that when they decided to move.

Literally why should politicians in a country give a fuck about FOREIGN workers? Those are not their constituents!

>A voter who chooses comfort and security by residing in a secure voting bloc

Who chooses to buy or rent based on their voting district, which could end up changing in a few years anyway? Normally, people check out the property tax rates and local services and infrastructure like roads, schools, crime and prisons, that sort of thing.

They don't and they shouldn't be expected to. But it is completely irrelevant, free trade is good for domestic workers.

If you mention NAFTA being a good thing to someone in the Rust Belt you have a good chance of getting decked.

t. Pittsburgh

If a company is only viable because the government fucks over everyone else and makes them buy you shitty product, your company isn't viable.

And there is more to the US than the Rust Belt. Looking at how free trade affects the well-paid machinist without looking at the poor Southerner who can now afford a car to drive to work is ridiculous.

For monarchy to fail, just one man must go insane. For democracy to fail, over half the citizens must go insane. Which is more likely?

See, I can make dumb oversimplifications too.

>Who chooses to buy or rent based on their voting district,

Voting patterns also mimic other population patterns, the most obvious example of which being a republican is unlikely to want to live in the democratic ghetto. There's also the obvious comfort of being around others of your own kind. In America political identity is a social identity. Not only are you buying into policies, but you are buying into a culture.

>Normally, people check out the property tax rates

Let me guess in which districts property taxes will be high and in which they will be low... All of a sudden the property tax debate becomes very relevant.

>and local services and infrastructure like roads, schools, crime and prisons, that sort of thing.

all amenities that must be paid for by taxpayers

>free trade is good for the worker
>except it isn't
Nice job blowing up your own argument you fucking faggot.

One quick google search of the quote proved it true.

Do not bother with them, they do not understand the true purpose of TPP which was to become the dominant power in Asia by cutting China out of the trade. They look at the economics and see no obvious benefit, but they cannot see that with the fall of TPP China is already engaging in trade talks with the neighbours. Other nations such as the Pacific Alliance nations in SA will shift to China as well. Just another way in which China is taking advantage of amerifats.

>Son, when you grow up, you're gonna work in the factory. Its literally the only type of job in the world except for all the other ones. Leave the other ones for the queers

You do know China is excluded from TPP, right? Or is this unknown to most americans?

Monarchy sucks.

Democracy sucks.

Republic is the way to go.

I just gave an example of third world labor, the same would apply to Vietnam

The whole excluding China thing is sort of the whole point of TPP. Better that a vietnamese orphan gets killed on the job than a chinese one

>Son, when you grow up, you're gonna be an unemployed shitter on bennies because Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton shipped the factories overseas and now Paco and Zhang work those jobs instead of you.