Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options

Quick monarchy question

124»

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LabRat
    Yes, it’s very Libertarian and Anarchist. The fact that you don’t see it proves you don’t understand nothing in Libertarianism nor Anarchy..

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! :D:D:D:D:D

    You are so politically misinformed its fucking hilarious! :D:D
    Monarchism is the fucking antithesis of anarchism you utter utter utter loon! Look up the etymology of the words sometime... :rolleyes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Labrat - serious question. Why would anarchists want a head of state when anarchists are opposed to the whole concept of the state?

    Where do you get your political knowledge from? The back of a cereal box?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    what a load of bollox ...i think we have a lot of history to fall back on here. try taking a look at aristocratic rule over the centuries.
    then have a wonder why people fought so hard to have democracy.
    i don't know how some of you people manage to fucking dress yourselves of a morning.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Blagsta
    Labrat - serious question. Why would anarchists want a head of state when anarchists are opposed to the whole concept of the state?

    Where do you get your political knowledge from? The back of a cereal box?
    I never said I want to have a head of state. I just said Monarchy is a less evil. Because democratic government has much more power over citizens than Monarchy.
    No, I don’t read things written on the back of cereal box. ( maybe it is interesting? Do you recommend to read it?) I read works of wise men like Lysander Spooner, Gustave Molinari, David Friedman, Murray Rothbard, Anthony de Jasay…you maybe never heard the names, it’s not surprising in the statist world. It would be really strange if for example such a masterpiece of social thought like No Treason by Spooner was taught in state schools…
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LabRat
    I never said I want to have a head of state. I just said Monarchy is a less evil. Because democratic government has much more power over citizens than Monarchy.

    Yes you did. You said
    "Yes, it’s very Libertarian and Anarchist. The fact that you don’t see it proves you don’t understand nothing in Libertarianism nor Anarchy."

    Which shows that you have a very confused understanding of libertarianism and anarchism.


    Originally posted by LabRat
    No, I don’t read things written on the back of cereal box. ( maybe it is interesting? Do you recommend to read it?) I read works of wise men like Lysander Spooner, Gustave Molinari, David Friedman, Murray Rothbard, Anthony de Jasay…you maybe never heard the names, it’s not surprising in the statist world. It would be really strange if for example such a masterpiece of social thought like No Treason by Spooner was taught in state schools…

    None of them are anarchists.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Blagsta
    Yes you did. You said
    "Yes, it’s very Libertarian and Anarchist. The fact that you don’t see it proves you don’t understand nothing in Libertarianism nor Anarchy."

    Which shows that you have a very confused understanding of libertarianism and anarchism.
    Don’t distort my words. Reread Thoreau.
    "That government is best which governs least"
    "That government is best which governs not at all"
    If it is not libertarian and anarchist that the opposite “That government is best which governs most" is libertarian and anarchist?
    And you have the nerve to blame me in misunderstanding and confusing?
    Originally posted by Blagsta

    None of them are anarchists.
    How can you judge if you never read them?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Labrat have you ever read Hobbes because your idea about the Monarchy being a more suitable government then democracy sounds very similair to his ideas in Leviathan

    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LabRat
    Don’t distort my words. Reread Thoreau.
    "That government is best which governs least"
    "That government is best which governs not at all"
    If it is not libertarian and anarchist that the opposite “That government is best which governs most" is libertarian and anarchist?
    And you have the nerve to blame me in misunderstanding and confusing?

    Jesus, this is like pulling teeth :rolleyes:

    Anarchists are against the whole concept of the state, of government or of any form of top down hierarchical organisation. And as such, the concept of anarchists wanting a monarchy is ludicrous. The 2 concepts are diametrically opposed opposites.


    Originally posted by LabRat
    How can you judge if you never read them?

    I know about anarchist politics and philosophy, and these aren't anarchists. They are free market libertarians. A big difference.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by marv
    Labrat have you ever read Hobbes because your idea about the Monarchy being a more suitable government then democracy sounds very similair to his ideas in Leviathan

    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/
    I didn’t read his works (well, I should I know, thanks for the link) but I read about this so I understand the whole conception. But I don’t accept his ‘war of all against all’ idea.
    There are also other kinds of proof in Monarchy‘s favour, like this by Bertrand de Jouvenel : ”But by opening the prospect of Power to all the ambitious talents, this arrangement makes the extension of Power much easier. Under the “ancien regime”, society’s moving spirits, who had, as they knew, no chance of a share in Power, were quick to denounce its smallest encroachment. Now, on the other hand, when everyone is potentially a minister, no one is concerned to cut down an office to which he aspires one day himself, or to put sand in a machine which he means to use himself when his turn comes. Hence, it is that there is in the political circles of a modern society a wide complicity in the extension of Power.”
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    But by having a monarchy where a person has unlimited power they are no checks and balances to make sure that they this person rules with the best interest of the masses.

    Also in democracy if the person is corrupt or is unpopular the person can be removed in a election. In a monarchy they is no mechanism where a unpopular mmonarchy can be removed and that it could lead to bloody civil war such as the English Civil War
Sign In or Register to comment.