[en] Monarchy, Republic other systems?

[Mircoslavux]

Hi everybody, :hello:
I would like to know your opinions about the system, which you prefere or like and you suggestions about the system in your own country. (present and If the system should be changed or not).

I suppose, because we all are fans of history games, many of us like monarchy and all about the nobility and so on.

I think this could be very interesting thread.


So write write write.
:go:

[Angryminer]

A general thought on political systems:
In absolute monarchy one man decides the fate of the nation. He might be a wise guy and it works out, or he's an idiot and he starts a World War (basically Hitler was an idiot and started WW2, WW1 also started, among other reasons, because of the stupidity of a german ruler, namely Wilhelm II).
In direct democracy the people decide the fate of the nation. While it is rather unpropable that all people simultaniously decide to lead the nation into doom it is also unpropable that they all recieve an economical enlightenment and take hard but necessary actions to drastically improve the situation of the nation.

As a result I believe that no system has an advantage over the other when you look at it in the long run. It's just that some systems are more risky and some systems are less risky.

Angryminer

[Elvain]

they all depend on responsibility of people.
If you have wise monarch controlled by some democratical institutions (as example I would use Napoleon) it's IMO better than direct democacy or just democracy with no strong personatlity deciding.

I wanted to use 2 examples from Czechoslovakian history but they would be too long...

To be honest I don't like democracy. People are not responsible enough to decide about things they don't understand. But who has the right to decide instead of him? and how can those responsible people get to the governments? and how to controll that they prefere interests of country above their own interests?
if dumb people have right to vote, nobody can save the world from a tragedy like Hitler's victory in elections.
So generaly if dumb monarch rules, it's bad. If dumb people can elect one of them in elections it's no better. The best system is that where educatred and wise people who understand problems decide about them, no matter if in autoritative or democratic way

Direct democracy is very good for small countries with highly educated people.
Dumb people need wise ruler and some organs of controll that will prevent dictature.

However, Division of power (executive, legislative and jurisdiction)seems to be be the best system without any doubt

[Angryminer]

Yes, my general thoughts go into the same direction, Elvain.
A vote in elections is so important that I sometimes doubt wether common people can handle it. How are people who don't read newspapers supposed to decide over their own fate and the fate of all other peoples in their nation?
Lately people decided on whole europe and what happened? The people said no to europe because they wanted to say no to their current ruling party. That's so incredible dumb that I personally want to ban every one of them from elections for lifetime...

But about the system:
When you establish an organ of control for the wise/evil ruler you automatically hinder him/her from doing
a) very bad decisions
b) very risky but wise/appropiate decisions.
You just lower the "evil-things-risk" in a slightly smaller step than usual democracy does at the cost of the "wise-things-propability".

Angryminer

[conquestare legionare]

Hmm poltic`s is not my topic but i know some things.In my opinion monarchy is not a the best system.The king no matter how good he is or how wise he cannot decide the fate of a kingdom. Even monarchy sounds like the early despotism total iron rule.He is allowed to skip justice and all of the laws if he so wishs.Just think the simplest logical thinking- what gives him the right to decide fate of people ? god gave him the right! but were is the proof? what makes him better then an ordinary healthy peasant ??.Of course every nation needs a leader but he cannot lead without the advice of the people and the advisors.I would like a system which runs like this - the leader suggests a sugesstion or a decision and the public should vote if they like it or not. if the suggestion or decision is approved by the public it should take the next stage and be discussed by an wise council. they should be able to decide if it is approved and acceptable or if the terms should be improved or even if it isnt acceptable. I dont know if something like this already exist as i said politics isnt my topic. Could someone with greater knowledge correct me please.

[Traveller]

I agree with Elvain and Angry, democracy IMHO is by far the most stupid form of government. Wait, the second most stupid - communism is on first - an even more utopical, but unrealizable idea. I'll give another example from the last few weeks:

On 25th of June there were elections in Bulgaria. They were supposed to be the most important ones, because they would finish the EU joining process and would have two (or if they don't do their job well - one) years in the EU. And what happened? Sociologists were saying that the Socialist party will win the most votes followed by the Kings party (Tzar Simeon II Saxe-Coburg-Gota who was a prim minister for the last 4 years). And so it happened. There are also 3 parties from the right opposition that disintegrated long ago and one party mainly of the Turkish minority (Movement for Rights and Freedoms) which somehow manages to stay in the parliament since 15 years. It even was in a ruling coalition with the Kings party for the last 4 years. By law, it's unconstitutional, because the law says that parties based on ethnic, religious (etc.) ground are illegal. And that's one of the reasons that a new "phenomenon" arrived in the parliament - the extremist far right-far left coalition "Ataka". It arrived with the promise to deal with the mafia in the parliament (mainly represented by Ahmed Dogan, MRF's leader), to bring back Bulgaria's honour and justice to all etc. Medias classified it as a xenophobic, nazist, faschist, anti-EU party and in a big matter they're right. It's leader, Volen Siderov, has many times on his meetings spoken about the "tziganisation and turkization" of the country (that's true, I agree), but with words that by themsleves are harmless. But everyone understands what stands behind them. Furthermore, this guy even copies Hitler's gestures with his hands (if you haven't seen such - watch Discovery channel, pretty much the same things). I'll also mention some of the points from his pre-election programme: getting out of NATO and Iraq and keeping a full neutrality (neutrality is good, but getting out of NATO would only hurt our interests), a pause in the EU joining negotiations and re-negotiating the closure of our nuclear power station "Kozlodui" (closing "Kozlodui" is useless as experts say it'll work fine for another 30 years, but pausing the negotiations could mean closing them forever) and such. And now what? This coalition got 8% from the people's votes. And because of these 8% of the people now we have an extremist party in the parliament, led by a lunatic, that might be Hitler II, endangering our international prestige, the EU joining and who know what else! And the rest 92% have to suffer only because some stupid people (not all of them, but most, I would say) decided to punish the politicians with this guy!

On the other hand, monarchy is better - one stable policy, that doesn't change every 4 years; a ruler who doesn't rob the country, because he doesn't know if he'll be there in the next mandate... I agree, if he's a lunatic like Hitler I and our Hitler II - then bad times are coming. But even if all people are idiots (as of today, including me :wink: ), a smart ruler could lead his country to better hights. So, every human form of government is imperfect! The one that Conquestare legionare proposed might work a little bit better, but it needs much more resources - to ask the people about every single decision, especially when it concerns strictly specialist decisions (finances for example) is...

[Mircoslavux]

So I think the parlamentary monarchy is the best combination (better then absolutory monarchy).
To Traveller:
Why Simeon II did not turn Bulgaria to Monarchy? Did not he find enough support for that?
How is the situation now?
In Slovakia: We have never our own King (btw. Moric Benovsky - famous Slovakian was the first King of Madagaskar). The first King of Hungarian Kingdom Stephen I was slovakian origin. But Slovakia was never its own.
I discover very interesting website last month ago about the aristocracy in Slovakia - it is very interesting - look here: http://azs.tsa.sk/
It is still a prototyp for a good website, I hope will be in the future. I'm in contact with this prince (last time yesterday). But still the Anoshkin - Radziwill are originally Polnisch-Lituanien origin.
And I'm not very sure about the right be the highest aristocracy in Slovakia???

Who is the highest aristocrat in Czech rep? (question on Elvain) Schwarzenberg?

[Traveller]

@Mircoslavux, Simeon II didn't want to turn Bulgaria from a Parliamentary republic to Monarchy. He was in exile for half a century and he came here as a normal citizen, not as a Tzar, as he really is. First, going from democracy to monarchy wouldn't be viewed very well from the other nations. Second, it wouldn't be viewed inside Bulgaria as well. For the past nearly 15 years people got use to anarchy and I doubt they/we would like a more centralised, thus active, power.

Btw Simeon II isn't of Bulgarian origin, too. He's from the Saxe-Coburg-Gota family, a cousin with many other royalties (the Queen of England for example), but his grandfather Tzar Ferdinand was of German origin. After our liberation in 1878 we had no aristocratic line of our own left, as the Turks had slaughtered them all right after they conquered us in 1396, so we had to "import" somebody from the outside. Same happened with Greece (some guy, Oton, I think), only Serbia afaik had their own kings - the Obrenovic and Mikhailovic families, Xuca will have to speak about this.

[Mircoslavux]

Btw Simeon II isn't of Bulgarian origin, too. He's from the Saxe-Coburg-Gota family, a cousin with many other royalties (the Queen of England for example), but his grandfather Tzar Ferdinand was of German origin. After our liberation in 1878 we had no aristocratic line of our own left, as the Turks had slaughtered them all right after they conquered us in 1396, so we had to "import" somebody from the outside. Same happened with Greece (some guy, Oton, I think), only Serbia afaik had their own kings - the Obrenovic and Mikhailovic families, Xuca will have to speak about this.[/QUOTE]

But you have in Bulgaria the Tzar court - unofficially or officially? In may countries like Germany, France which are not monarchy exist such court with aristocracy.
This was nearly destroyed in all "communistic" country or east block - during the 40 years.

[Elvain]

Yes, Mirco, you are right. Karel of Schwarzenberg is the highes arisotcrat in the Czech rep.
Some people here would liek to see monarchy again, but there is no Czech dynasty as well. The only way how to have rightfull monarch is to call back Habsburgs, but nobody would agree with that (also because it would be illegal not only by Czech law)

btw, Traveller, I see nothing bad in turning a country from parliamentary republic toparliamentary monarchy. If you have rightfull heir and it is will of people, why not? In parliamentary system it's not so important who is head of state, if a president or a monarch because the main power is held by the prime minister(but in presidental republic of US or Russian style it would be something very diferent)

[Traveller]

Uhm... I'm not sure if I understand your question. We still have people from the royal family (Simeon II, who fled as a little boy to Spain or the States), but they no longer have any power, unless, ofcourse, they become prime-ministers or something... The Tzar's institution as such no longer exists.

Elvain, I'm a monarchist myself. I would be glad to have a parliamentary monarchy, like in Brittain. But too much people wouldn't, especially those people that currently hold the power. Mission impossible.

[Elvain]

I know. I just wanted to say that if somebody changes parliamentary republic to parliamentary monarchy it is almost no change...
the only is that the state will be them more say aristocratic and a monarch(tzar in your case) will be head of state instead of president.

[Mircoslavux]

[QUOTE=Elvain]Yes, Mirco, you are right. Karel of Schwarzenberg is the highes arisotcrat in the Czech rep.
Some people here would liek to see monarchy again, but there is no Czech dynasty as well. The only way how to have rightfull monarch is to call back Habsburgs, but nobody would agree with that (also because it would be illegal not only by Czech law)

Do you know aristocrat Drozd? http://drozd.info/
In you country were many properties given back to their previous owner - artistocracy. Are you in agree with it?
It is a big deal now in Slovakia, because we have many historical buildings which are in very bad stage and needs renovation. But the state has not enough money for it. So last decades was sold out about 200-300 of castles, castels, and so on.

[Elvain]

we have now serious problems with František Josef Kinský(well, one of Czech aristocrats of Czech origin)
It is not only problem of aristocrats but also Germans who lived here before WW2. Those who have not proven they fought against the nazis lost all their property. I would agree in returning of some property to them, but not museums or other cultural institutions that may then disappear because having no buildings where to move. Also this property is owned now by somebody else for 60 years.
It's too complicated for me

[Mircoslavux]

we have now serious problems with František Josef Kinský(well, one of Czech aristocrats of Czech origin)
It is not only problem of aristocrats but also Germans who lived here before WW2. Those who have not proven they fought against the nazis lost all their property. I would agree in returning of some property to them, but not museums or other cultural institutions that may then disappear because having no buildings where to move. Also this property is owned now by somebody else for 60 years.
It's too complicated for me

Yeah, I have heard about Kinsky. Yes he is german - czech origin, but he has not impressed me, because he can not express himself in Czech :lol:
The problem in Slovakia last centuries was:that the majority of aristocracy has reached only minor level (Zemani) all the higher Aristocracy slovakian Origin was magyarised or excomunicated and their ownership was taken and given to Magyars. But still some of them remained.

[Richard]

Well I'm not an expert at this but in my opinion all goverment types are good IF and only IF the ladder/s know what they are doing, and want to help the people. All goverments can be bad too, if the ladder/s are power hungry and anbicius. Democrasy for example can become worst than a dicatorship. Look at US goverment for example. In my opinion it isn't much of a democracy now days. Why? The same party controls most of the branches, meaning the presisdent has practically full power as he will have most of the support to make decitions, meaning the "checks and balances" aren't of much use here...
There can't be a perfect goverment, as we aren't perfect at making the correct decicion, are we? And there is allways corruption in one way or another. Someone running for presindency might cheat at the election "caught"

In my opinion a true democracy would be the best form of goverment because people will actually make decicions, thu it will work the best in a small country.

[Mircoslavux]

Hallo everybody
Does somebody know anything about the noble family: Anoshkin-Radziwill?
Specially people from Polen, Lituana or Russia...
thanks for your information :go:

[conquestare legionare]

http://www.szlachta.org/2radziwill.htm

mirco i found this it might intressting for you.

[Mircoslavux]

http://www.szlachta.org/2radziwill.htm

mirco i found this it might intressting for you.

Thanks for a nice web.
What I'm looking for is : When have the Families Anoshkin and Radziwill became together??
I will ask somewhere on that website.

[conquestare legionare]

Glad i could help you :smile: :cheers: