3 ms·

An egalitarian society sounds interesting; someone should try it. I can respect the honesty of a monarchy. We have a fake egalitarian society where most of ou

by VLM 10y ago

An egalitarian society sounds interesting; someone should try it. I can respect the honesty of a monarchy. We have a fake egalitarian society where most of our leaders must either be Bush, Clinton, Roosevelt, Kennedy, or be closely related by marriage. Not to mention the behind the scenes families that control and pay for it all. Its disrespectful to the concept of democracy to view Hillaries coronation party as anything other than a hereditary monarchy ceremony. If it were not for Trump (and thank God for Trump), Jeb's coronation party would have been held the week prior. In that way I can respect a monarchy much more than a fake, false democracy. Someone in the English queen's family will rule after her; thank you for at least being honest about it.

BigDaddyD 10y ago
The big thing you're missing is how the separation of powers in the US prevents what you describe as a "monarchy" from ruling as a monarchy. Besides in your own comment you admit that Trump goes against this idea. We don't have even close to a monarchial society.
mindslight 10y ago
I agree with most of what you wrote, but you're falling for the same tired hopechange if you think Trump isn't just the another skin on the same old corruption. The entire job of candidates is to channel people's discontent into support by sounding revolutionary. Once they're in office, their job becomes supporting the status quo and implementing the long-term designs of the people, as you said, who control and pay for it all. This iteration, the red team is frustrated and united (having been straight opposition for the past eight years), while the blue team is divided and unenthused (having seen eight years of disappointment under their own banner). So the red team sees a savior, some blue team defects to third parties or (rationally) stays home, and the cycle repeats. At least my peers will go back to latent libertarianism.

by VLM 10y ago

BigDaddyD 10y ago

The big thing you're missing is how the separation of powers in the US prevents what you describe as a "monarchy" from ruling as a monarchy. Besides in your own comment you admit that Trump goes against this idea. We don't have even close to a monarchial society.

mindslight 10y ago

I agree with most of what you wrote, but you're falling for the same tired hopechange if you think Trump isn't just the another skin on the same old corruption. The entire job of candidates is to channel people's discontent into support by sounding revolutionary. Once they're in office, their job becomes supporting the status quo and implementing the long-term designs of the people, as you said, who control and pay for it all. This iteration, the red team is frustrated and united (having been straight opposition for the past eight years), while the blue team is divided and unenthused (having seen eight years of disappointment under their own banner). So the red team sees a savior, some blue team defects to third parties or (rationally) stays home, and the cycle repeats. At least my peers will go back to latent libertarianism.