UK is a monarchy.

[MikeH]

I can't believe you told them.

[notyoueither]

More like Arnoreans. Fallen empire and all that.

It isn't fallen... it's sleeping.

[kentonio]

I can't believe you told them.

You're a mod, just have them all 'pacified' or whatever we're calling it these days.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

It isn't fallen... it's sleeping.

Yeah someday King Arthur will return from Avalon.

[Lorizael]

The only real difference is that it used to involve a lot more bloodshed.

Yes, that's the difference, and it's a big one. Dynasties in America represent people doing what they do, cognitive biases and all, through a democratic process. Dynasties in constitutional monarchies represent blood.

[kentonio]

Yes, that's the difference, and it's a big one. Dynasties in America represent people doing what they do, cognitive biases and all, through a democratic process. Dynasties in constitutional monarchies represent blood.

Pretty simplistic and idealistic to be fair. Many of your dynastic families are in the political position they are in because they made huge amounts of cash, something that is rarely done without ****ing over a good number of people along the way. The dream of 'a simple man rising to the top through hard work' happens of course, but not without the patronage of wealthy benefactors and not that often anyway usually. The idea that democratic process has much of anything to do with your leaders is pretty laughable. You're basically given a choice of one of a small pre-selected group.

As for royals and blood, for the large part successful monarchies had a lot more to do with clever marriages and cunning manipulation of power figures and peasants rather than actual bloodshed.

[Sava]

It's always funny when people defend the indefensible.

[kentonio]

It's not a defense, we all live under imperfect systems. I just find it funny when people get all preachy about how great their own systems are when in reality there's not much difference when you get down to the roots of things.

[Sava]

Don't confuse hate of one for love of another.

[notyoueither]

Yeah someday King Arthur will return from Avalon.

*whoosh

[Lorizael]

It's not a defense, we all live under imperfect systems. I just find it funny when people get all preachy about how great their own systems are when in reality there's not much difference when you get down to the roots of things.

We went through this in the other thread. The US system is pretty ****ty, but it's ****ty in a democratic way. Britain is also a democratic country, but its head of state and one branch of its legislature are not democratic. And they're not less democratic than other institutions, they are simply not democratic. There are parts of the US system that are very bad at being democratic, but they are still democratic in nature.

Remember that when I say this, I don't say it in a moral sense but a definitional sense. There's nothing fundamentally better about democracy than other systems, but democracy does have some benefits that we find pretty valuable nowadays. The biggest one is probably the peaceful transfer of power. Yes, when the Queen dies there will not be a bloody fight for the throne, but that's because your royalty has been neutered by your democracy.

But that's pretty much the only benefit I see in the democratic process itself. There are other features of government we often see in democratic countries, but they are not necessarily tied to the franchise. If we could have an egalitarian government that exercised peaceful transfer of power and allowed freedom of expression and association but was not in any sense democratic, I wouldn't see much of a problem with that.

[Ben Kenobi]

We're the Númenóreans, you are Gondor. How is this so difficult to understand?

And the Jews are Elves?

[kentonio]

We went through this in the other thread. The US system is pretty ****ty, but it's ****ty in a democratic way. Britain is also a democratic country, but its head of state and one branch of its legislature are not democratic. And they're not less democratic than other institutions, they are simply not democratic. There are parts of the US system that are very bad at being democratic, but they are still democratic in nature.

You talk about some of our institutions not being democratic, and in a literal sense you are perfectly correct, however the influence those sections have is so severely limited that to be honest it barely matters. I don't know why Americans struggle with this so much, I can only assume it's because in your system the branches of government are actually intended to be of equal importance. Despite terms like 'Head of State' our Queen is not the one who is comparable to your President, the Prime Minister is. Our House of Lords is not your Senate.

Remember that when I say this, I don't say it in a moral sense but a definitional sense. There's nothing fundamentally better about democracy than other systems, but democracy does have some benefits that we find pretty valuable nowadays. The biggest one is probably the peaceful transfer of power. Yes, when the Queen dies there will not be a bloody fight for the throne, but that's because your royalty has been neutered by your democracy.

What I'm really curious about is why this is apparently a worst system than your form of democracy which has been largely taken over by corporate lobbying and large financial interests (although we have some of that too of course)? Once a week the PM goes and has a chat with the Queen about events in the country, she ceremoniously opens parliament each year, and rubberstamps some stuff for the government, yet this someone makes our form of democracy undemocratic?

[Lorizael]

I don't remember ever saying the British system was worse than the American system, nor did I say your system was undemocratic. I said your Queen and your House of Lords are not democratic. As a whole, you have a very democratic government.

[PLATO]

Once a week the PM goes and has a chat with the Queen about events in the country

How can anyone be against a conversation like this. Imagine if the U.S. had someone the President could go and discuss things with who had been at the center of the political and foreign policy scene for 60+ years. The Queen brings a perspective that must be invaluable to the PMs.