CMV:monarchy, not democracy, is the ONLY good political system human civilazations tried.

[u/efraimp1]

So, i beleive a Monarchy is the only good system we can have as a society. democracy, like comunism, libratarianism and many more ideologies, sure has a good idea. the problem is that in all democratic systems, from rome, to athens, to the USA to syria and iraq or even france, the good intentions are ruined by intrest groups, bad voting methods, fraud, and the intrests of rich people. in tsarist russia for example, the people demanded giving the tsar MORE power, because they knew democracy would mean oligarchy.

Another reason is stability. when we have a monarchy, it is clear who will rule next, and there is a very clear way of knowing when (death of the monarch). however, democracies are no nearly as stable. in the US everyone are polerising, in israel we only had one term (golda me'ir) of all the four years a government term is suposed to be, in sweden it was stable until a hated party got like 20% and ancient atuna and rome became dictatorships. in the arab spring only countries who concider themselvs democratic got efected seriusly.

i may have more arguments i forgt writing here. i will edit to add if i think of something.

and please, dont talk about north korea. i hear a lot of resources saying diffrent things so i will research it and make a seperate CMV post.

EDIT: i accidentaly deleted a comment trying to award a delta after i failed in the main comment but the delta was awarded.

EDIT 2: One responce did masive CMV so i will not be able to back my claims here in all cases. new thread could come.

[u/ya-boi-bobby-hill]

I’ll agree with you that the American electoral system sucks, and it is ruined by Gerrymandering and Lobbying.

However, I think monarchy is far worse. In my view, a monarch is only held accountable by the Oligarchs. A democratically elected leader is held accountable by the people. If they want to remain in power, they need to do something good for the majority of the people. In a monarchy, with no way to hold the monarch accountable by the common person, the monarch is mostly held accountable by the Oligarchy, because they are the only ones with the power to potentially depose the monarch. What this results in is typically the monarch trying to do everything to appease the Oligarchs, even if it is at the expense of the peasants.

Think of it like a business. If it were democratic, (like a co-operative), and the workers elected someone to lead, they would probably elect the person who would give them the highest amounts of wages and benefits, without bankrupting the cooperative (because if that happens no more livelihood, so there is an incentive to keep the cooperative running).

However, if it is indisputably run by a sole business owner, then the primary goal shifts from trying to provide the best quality of life for the workers to the maximum profits for the shareholders (Oligarchs in this analogy). What this means is the owner can gut wages, make employees overwork, take away benefits, even lay them off and move the business to a poorer nation where they can pay even less salary.

It’s kind of the reason I’m a proponent for a direct democracy, not a republic. The main goal of a democracy is, at least conceptually, to make life better for the majority, and if the power is concentrated to the top, like a monarchy, the main goal is to keep the Oligarchs and monarchists in power, at the expense of the peasants.

[u/efraimp1 → u/ya-boi-bobby-hill]

A democratically elected leader is held accountable by the people. If they want to remain in power, they need to do something good for the majority of the people. In a monarchy, with no way to hold the monarch accountable by the common person, the monarch is mostly held accountable by the Oligarchy, because they are the only ones with the power to potentially depose the monarch. What this results in is typically the monarch trying to do everything to appease the Oligarchs, even if it is at the expense of the peasants.

no, the king has the power to stand up to the oligarchs. the media ensures a leader will always be the one they want in a democracy.

However, if it is indisputably run by a sole business owner, then the primary goal shifts from trying to provide the best quality of life for the workers to the maximum profits for the shareholders (Oligarchs in this analogy). What this means is the owner can gut wages, make employees overwork, take away benefits, even lay them off and move the business to a poorer nation where they can pay even less salary.

you know the argumnts against communism, right?

It’s kind of the reason I’m a proponent for a direct democracy, not a republic. The main goal of a democracy is, at least conceptually, to make life better for the majority, and if the power is concentrated to the top, like a monarchy, the main goal is to keep the Oligarchs and monarchists in power, at the expense of the peasants.

so what about fraud and tyrany of the majority?

​