Historical filth- The case against hereditary monarcy

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Ecthelion
We also have a PM (well, chancellor) and a president and it's just fine, thank you

Our president even lives in some kind of noble castle

How French of you

[Ecthy]

I fully agree?

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Ecthelion
I fully agree?

lol. Poly didnt register my post

[Ecthy]

It's different in France. Jacques C has power, like Vladimir P or Bill C (oh that would be George B now). Our pres guys have no power though. They're just there.

[Vesayen]

Re: Historical filth- The case against hereditary monarcy

Originally posted by Ron Jeremy
Anyone recalling the Historical filth article "Eunuchs with balls" will know that massive corruption and reigns of terror resulted.

Im totaly serious can I get a link to that article/site? I'd like to read it.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

The theory that a President would cost more than a Royal Family is based on the costs associated with elections, etc.

What price are you willing to place on democracy?


One other point- those who think their Royal families are cost-effective. Do you really think you couldn't make even more money by using those palaces and properties for other purposes?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Vesayen- as requested.

Historical filth- Eunuchs with balls.


I've always been keen to salute the achievements of those to whom Lady Luck has seen fit to visit disabilities of one kind or other. In the big scheme of things, having your testicles removed may not be as devastating as being blinded but it does carry a certain stigma, and few eunuchs have managed to achieve power.
A few managed it however, and what a bizarre bunch they were. For your enlightenment, I'd like to present (in reverse order) my personal ten favourite eunuchs of all time.


10- Ts'ai Lun (50-121AD China)
Chinese court official who was chief eunuch to emperor Ho-ti. Ts'ai Lun's greatest achievement was his invention of paper, replacing papyrus, parchment and silk as the writing surface of choice. Later made a marquess in recognition of his works.


9- Le Van Duyet (1763-1832AD Vietnam)
Born without a man-plum to his name, Le Van Duyet started out as a counselor to the Vietnamese court before going on to become a government official and great military strategist. Using his formidable skills, he defeated rivals in naval encounters, establishing Prince Nguyen Anh as emperor of a united Vietnam. Duyet became viceroy, and pursued pro-European and pro-Christian policies. Demonised after his death, Duyet's reputation was later restored and his grave made a national monument.


8- Origen (185- 254AD Lebanon)
One of the greatest theologians of the early Greek church, Origen faced a great dilemma. How could he instruct women without interruptions from unruly genitalia? Eventually he found a solution. For reasons of taste I won't go into depth on what his solution was, other than to say that it qualified him for inclusion in this list. Ouch


7- Liu Chin. (d 1510AD)
Liu owed his power to the Emperor Cheng-te, who is described as an "eccentric pleasure-seeker". Despite extensive searches I've failed to establish what those pleasures were so I'm going to assume it involves goats smeared in butter at some point.
Being far too preoccupied to be arsed with ruling, Cheng-te relied on his eunuchs for information on the government, and the eunuch quickly gained great power. Liu was the most prominent, and the first of the "Eight Tigers"- de facto eunuch rulers of China. Seeing as Liu wasn't distracted by sexual vices he concentrated on greed instead, and embezzled a huge fortune, terrorizing the country in the process.
When the emperor discovered the extent of his crimes, Liu was executed but he left a legacy of Eunuch Power that dominated China for the next century.

6- Eutropius (d. 399AD Byzantium)
Through arranging a marriage, Eutropius sidled into the position of chief advisor to the utterly useless emperor Arcadius. Arcadius, to be blunt, couldn't get laid in a brothel and was only to pleased to delegate power to Eutropias who became the most powerful man in the Eastern Roman Empire. After successfully repelling a Hunnish invasion of Asia Minor he became the first Consul with no groinal luggage. Unfortunately, Arcadius's wife Eudoxia couldn't stand him, and within a year Eutropias was exiled to Cyprus and beheaded.


5- Narses (480-574AD Armenia/Byzantium/Rome)
How Narses came to be geographically estranged from his trouser vegetables remains unclear, but his eunuch status didn't stop him becoming a prominent General under the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I and effectively restoring imperial control over Italy. Previously he had been commander of the imperial bodyguard of eunuchs, imperial treasurer, spy and Grand Chamberlain. One of Byzantium's greatest military leaders, he crushed the Ostrogothic kingdom in Italy and repelled invasions of northern Italy by Franks and Allemandes. He fell from favour after the death of Justinian and died peacefully in retirement.

4- Philetaerus (343-263BC Anatolia)
Eunuchs might be able to do most things in life, but you'd think that founding a dynasty might pose them a few technical problems. The enterprising Philetaerus succeeded, however and for that alone he deserves a mention. One of life's crafty buggers, Philetaerus served under Anitigonus I Monophthalmus (successor of Alexander the Great in northern Anatolia), but swapped allegiances to his rival Lysimachus, the ruler of Thrace. In return, the grateful Lysimachus made him guardian of the fortress of Pergamum, but Philetaerus promptly switched sides in favour of Seleucus I (Alexander's successor in Syria). On the death of Seleucus Philetaerus switched allefiances to Egypt. By this time he had established Pergamum as a small but influential kingdom under his control. He adopted one of his nephews (Eumenes) as a son who contined the dynasty on the death of Philetaerus.


3- Wei Chung-Hsien (1568- 1627AD China)
Probably the most famous eunuch ever, Wei was one of the "Eight Tigers"- a series of eunuchs who effectively ruled Ming dynasty China. Starting out as a butler, Wei gained the trust of Prince T'ien-chi. When T'ien-chi became emperor at the age of 15 he displayed a typically (and admirably, if you want my opinion) Chinese attitude to the job and preferred to spend all his time working as a carpenter, leaving all the boring stuff like military conquest, running the country and amassing glory to his trusted Wei.
In predictable style for a castrate on the make, Wei promptly launched a reign of terror, executing hundreds of potential political rivals and levying extortionate taxes. Temples were raised in his honour, but on the death of T'ien-chi Wei was banished and killed himself to avoid trial.


2- Chao Kao (d 237 BC China).
One of the most bizarre and blood-splattered episodes of all time. Chao Kao, clearly nursing a grudge over his enforced separation from his love-spuds, seized power in China on the death of Shih Huang-ti, first emperor of the Ch'in dynasty. He did so by concealing the fact that the emperor was dead, and forging letters in the emperor's hand which were sent to the Crown Prince and the Commander of the Northern Army, ordering them both to commit suicide. Displaying both tremendous loyalty and staggering gullibility, they both complied leaving Chao Kao free of inconvenient rivals.
Continuing his pretence that the emperor was alive by keeping his rotting corpse in a wagon of salted fish, Chao Kao installed the infant Hu Hai on the throne. However, even a kid was too scary a competitor for the seriously paranoid Chao Kao. Result? Hu Hai brutally murdered. Chao Kao then installed another puppet on the throne, pausing only to murder his former accomplice Li Ssu.
Amazingly, he then attempted to assassinate that puppet too, but at that point Chao Kao's luck finally deserted him. His end was bloody, violent and probably quite noisy, in a crunchy sort of way.


1- Bagoas (Persia 4th century BC)
Or "Bag of arse" as this brutal and de-bollocked maniac is lovingly known in schools. Clearly 4th century Persia was single-entendre nirvana, for Bagoas is best known for his manipulation of Arses. King Arses, to be precise. Anyway, a serious deficiency in the dangly department did not prevent Bagoas becoming a major military leader (and looter on an immense scale) in the conquest of Egypt. He topped this by becoming chief advisor (and effective controller) of King Artaxerxes III.
He wasn't content to stop there, however. Bagoas murdered Artaxerxes, then murdered all of Artazerxes' sons with the exception of young Arses, who he installed as a puppet, allowing Bagoas to talk through his Arses.
Arses proved to be a pain in the arse for Bagoas, and quickly became ungovernable as he rebelled against the eunuch's tyrannical authority. Arses attempted to poison Bagoas, but the attempt failed and Bagoas poisoned the young king. He then installed Darius III on the throne, but once again the young king rebelled and a flurry of assassination attempts followed. Eventually Bagoas was forced to drink his own poison and history became much less entertaining as a result.

Moral of the story? If you wake up one morning and find your underpants roomier than usual, don't despair. A career as a murderous dictator and scheming psychopath can still be yours.

[Vesayen]

LOLLLLLLL thats great!

Can you give me a link to the site where you got these from?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

I write them, Vesayen. It's just a case of presenting history in a muck-raking tabloid style.

[Vesayen]

Those are very, very well written.

[moomin]

Originally posted by Ron Jeremy
The theory that a President would cost more than a Royal Family is based on the costs associated with elections, etc.

That's a part, yes. The other part is that a king sells one heck of a lot better than a president, and generates a lot of free publicity, especially in all those republics where people can't seem to get enough of royalty. Swedish industry drags our poor king all over the globe on sales promotions for everything from Bofors canons to Volvo trucks. They're are very satisfied with the results.

What price are you willing to place on democracy?

Oh please. If there are problems with democracy in Sweden they have everything to do with the fact that the Social Democrats have been in the government for the last 80 years almost continuosly, and pretty little to do with the fact that we have to endure Kalle XVIs rosy face once a year on the TV when he wishes his loyal subjects a happy new year.

One other point- those who think their Royal families are cost-effective. Do you really think you couldn't make even more money by using those palaces and properties for other purposes?

I understand your royal family costs you a lot, but that's not the case here. The court foots most of the bill for the royal palaces and the court state out of it's own substancial pocket, and given strange historical circumstances I actually think Sweden would own the royal family money if we sat down to untangle all the bills.

If you let your royals bleed you dry, that's your problem. Get off our case.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

....and where did the substantial pockets of the Swedish royals come from? Persuade me that wholescale theft didn't come into the equation at some point.

You missed the point about democracy. Whatever their involvement in politics, I can't see any justification for a head of state not being elected. Again, try persuading me that there should be no democratic choice.

Thirdly- do the presence of Royals mean we are commercial powerhouses in comparison to pauper republics like the US, France and Germany?

[Ecthy]

what is 'pauper'? a messed up version of 'proper' or the realist satirical statement of 'paper republic' misspelled? if the latter, how would we be a paper republic

[Ramo]

Not bad, laz.

[moomin]

Originally posted by Ron Jeremy
....and where did the substantial pockets of the Swedish royals come from?

From Napoleon's France, mostly. The first king in our current line (the Bernadottes) started his career as one of Nappy's field marshals, and got rewared with titles, and riches by the Emperor for his abilities and service. When a totally broke Sweden - looking state bankrupcy in the eye after the disastrous exploits of the last few kings and Karl XII especially - went looking fo a new head on the throne we choose this charming fella because he handsomly paid of the Swedish depts out of his own pocket... can you imagine?

Anyway, he also brought with him the Carribean island of S:t Bartholomey, which again Nappy had given him, and which the Bernadottes later on sold back to France to save Sweden from another tight financial squeeze. Overall, our current line of kings have done admirably in this respect.

Incidentally, and this might interest various flame artists here at Poly, there were high hopes in Sweden that the glorious field marshal would take on Russia and reclaim Finland, which Sweden had recently lost. Bernadotte, however, declared Finland was useless, kissed and made up with the Tzar, and promply invaded and occupied Norway instead. But that's neither here nor there.

Persuade me that wholescale theft didn't come into the equation at some point.

Well, that may be, but that theft's mostly being Nappy's, I think we can live with the guilt. If the French aren't losing sleep over it - and who are you kidding? - why should we?

You missed the point about democracy. Whatever their involvement in politics, I can't see any justification for a head of state not being elected. Again, try persuading me that there should be no democratic choice.

Oh, you're quite right from a theoritical point of view. Clearly a hereditary head of state is an abomination. But there are quite a few way more urgent things to fix in Sweden regarding democracy... so it's not like we intend to lose sleep over that either. The king serves us well. If we ever manage to get to where removing him is the biggest democratic problem we face - then I personally think our system will be so good I wouldn't rock the boat.

Thirdly- do the presence of Royals mean we are commercial powerhouses in comparison to pauper republics like the US, France and Germany?

That strawman is downright bizzare, you know. Our king earns his keep in sales - according to those who should know, the industry dudes who have him heading Swedish delegations all over the globe. But I think it's a wee bit much to expect from the man to singlehandedly make up for socialist government polices, a crushing tax burden and a ever more expensive welfare state and then bemoan we can't compete with countries where these conditions don't exist.

Then again, given our historic track record of finding new kings that solve our problems out of their own pockets, perhaps the time has come to try a new drive. We should check if Bill Gates is interested in becoming the new king of Sweden and paying off our aggegated state debts - should be petty enough cash for him! And then we can all live happily ever after off the proceeds from Windows!