3 ms·

Can't believe there are still monarchs in 2016. Definitely there are millions of people living in 1500. Abolish monarchy!!!

eveningcoffee 10y ago
There are more unbelievable things taking place on Earth.
rosser 10y ago
There's a pretty substantial difference between an absolute monarchy and a constitutional one (which Thailand is). Just ask the Dutch how they feel about it, for example. Monarchies are not necessarily bad, and the kind of shallow, absolutist thinking displayed here contributes nothing to the discussion.
- truth_sentinell 10y ago
  What do you mean by constitutional? The are two types: Inherited monarchy and "elected". In the last, the election is from a specific group of people and the monarch is not chosen by Public vote. Nobody should have privileges above others and the power to constitutionally influence their lives just because they happened to be born in a "royal family". Apparently we have some UK's Queen fans, since my comment is down voted.
  - rosser 10y ago
    Seriously, if you don't know (or can't do the research to figure out) the difference between a constitutional monarchy and the other kinds, you really don't have a lot of basis to be weighing in, IMO. Again, look at how the Dutch do it. As with so many other things in this world, they get it pretty damned right.
    - truth_sentinell 10y ago
      From wikipedia: > The monarchy of the Netherlands passes by right of succession to the heirs of William I.[Cons 1] The heir is determined through two mechanisms: absolute cognatic primogeniture and proximity of blood. Again, what are you talking about mate? The fact that their country is doing well doesn't mean it's ok to decide on the lives of people just because you're the son of a monarch. There could be a lot of people more prepare and that could do better.
      - flukus 10y ago
        Now look up what power a King has in a constitutional monarchy. Hint: It's fuck all.
SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
...You realize that a lot of Western countries, like the UK, Canada, New Zealand, etc are monarchies, right? Thailand largely functions either as a parliamentary system or military junta, depending on the year.
- superfluid 10y ago
  In practice, Canada is about as close to a monarchy as North Korea is to a democracy.
clock_tower 10y ago
Consider that people instinctively believe that the top of the government -- or at least the head of their tribe -- is more or less blameless. ("The good Tsar" and all that.) With a king or queen with limited powers, that halo lands somewhere where it can't do much harm; the head of state has limited powers, and the head of government (Prime Minister, Chancellor, etc.) can be justly evaluated, and despised if necessary. But if you have a president, dictator, unconstitutional monarch, or the like, the halo attaches to them, and it can do a lot of damage; have you tried talking with a devout Republican about Guantanamo Bay lately?

eveningcoffee 10y ago

There are more unbelievable things taking place on Earth.

rosser 10y ago

There's a pretty substantial difference between an absolute monarchy and a constitutional one (which Thailand is). Just ask the Dutch how they feel about it, for example. Monarchies are not necessarily bad, and the kind of shallow, absolutist thinking displayed here contributes nothing to the discussion.

truth_sentinell 10y ago
What do you mean by constitutional? The are two types: Inherited monarchy and "elected". In the last, the election is from a specific group of people and the monarch is not chosen by Public vote. Nobody should have privileges above others and the power to constitutionally influence their lives just because they happened to be born in a "royal family". Apparently we have some UK's Queen fans, since my comment is down voted.
- rosser 10y ago
  Seriously, if you don't know (or can't do the research to figure out) the difference between a constitutional monarchy and the other kinds, you really don't have a lot of basis to be weighing in, IMO. Again, look at how the Dutch do it. As with so many other things in this world, they get it pretty damned right.
  - truth_sentinell 10y ago
    From wikipedia: > The monarchy of the Netherlands passes by right of succession to the heirs of William I.[Cons 1] The heir is determined through two mechanisms: absolute cognatic primogeniture and proximity of blood. Again, what are you talking about mate? The fact that their country is doing well doesn't mean it's ok to decide on the lives of people just because you're the son of a monarch. There could be a lot of people more prepare and that could do better.
    - flukus 10y ago
      Now look up what power a King has in a constitutional monarchy. Hint: It's fuck all.

SomeStupidPoint 10y ago

...You realize that a lot of Western countries, like the UK, Canada, New Zealand, etc are monarchies, right? Thailand largely functions either as a parliamentary system or military junta, depending on the year.

superfluid 10y ago
In practice, Canada is about as close to a monarchy as North Korea is to a democracy.

clock_tower 10y ago

Consider that people instinctively believe that the top of the government -- or at least the head of their tribe -- is more or less blameless. ("The good Tsar" and all that.) With a king or queen with limited powers, that halo lands somewhere where it can't do much harm; the head of state has limited powers, and the head of government (Prime Minister, Chancellor, etc.) can be justly evaluated, and despised if necessary. But if you have a president, dictator, unconstitutional monarch, or the like, the halo attaches to them, and it can do a lot of damage; have you tried talking with a devout Republican about Guantanamo Bay lately?