Author Topic: PolitiCentral  (Read 76658 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Grif101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Male
  • Monarchist Canuck
    • PostalGRIFF101
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #50 on: November 15, 2012, 08:14:32 AM »
Not really all you have to do is say you are right. When in fact in my eyes you are wrong, I see the world as better off without monarchies and those who believe they should rule the time for them has come and passed.

I just really have to disagree with you on every point but you are free to have your delusions. :P

If you want to stay in your little bubble and be in denial, I won't stop you. But I have not seen you give any adequate counter-arguments to the facts I've posted, so I must assume that I am right. :P
I'm back people...


Offline Tobbs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8275
  • Gender: Male
  • The Space Pope
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #51 on: November 15, 2012, 08:22:19 AM »
I don't know much about most of those monarchies you counted up, but you can't credit the Swedish and Danish monarchs for our prosperity. They don't actually do anything, they're just ornaments. You made me see how important monarchies were for one's national culture, Grif, but I'm still a hardcore democracy supporter, even though most democracies needs a good purging right now.

Keep calm and move along.

Offline LordNecross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7538
  • Gender: Male
  • The Pariah
    • SenHai
    • Sen Hai
    • SenHai
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #52 on: November 15, 2012, 08:26:28 AM »
If you want to stay in your little bubble and be in denial, I won't stop you. But I have not seen you give any adequate counter-arguments to the facts I've posted, so I must assume that I am right. :P
Welp all i have to really say is your system is flawed as you have stated it. Its unstable and would only be good in the short term, as Monarchies go stale. A US style Democracy while having its own problems, gives its people enough say to make change while establishing a government that can decide for its people as well.

It allows for multiple ideologies, and gives people a right to decide. A monarchy, while like a constitutional one, (Which borrows ideas from Republics to let you know), gives people rights and such, but the amount of power and privilege given to special families that really no more deserve power than the next bloke have all the say.

Also I am going based off what you said :D. With a single person given that much responsibility you have to hope each successor is a damn saint to keep the people happy, or become oppressive and make the people fear you, which I see as not preferable but it does garner control.

Now I have to say, that what is best depends on the times i can give you that, however I will say as time progresses, the need for a monarchy, as it already stands will grow less and less.

That is not to say Monarchies will die out, but Democracy in the end will rule, as the world reaches a point where cooperation between nations is necessary, One man will never be given the right to rule, and so it will come down to a global democracy in the end.

Imperialism is dead, as people who attempt such things now generally don't succeed, and that has always seemed to me to be a big part of Monarchies.

I just don't see a Monarchy as good. A Parliamentary one maybe but that is essentially only a few steps away from a republic. ;)

Offline LordNecross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7538
  • Gender: Male
  • The Pariah
    • SenHai
    • Sen Hai
    • SenHai
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #53 on: November 15, 2012, 08:27:53 AM »
I don't know much about most of those monarchies you counted up, but you can't credit the Swedish and Danish monarchs for our prosperity. They don't actually do anything, they're just ornaments. You made me see how important monarchies were for one's national culture, Grif, but I'm still a hardcore democracy supporter, even though most democracies needs a good purging right now.
Thats cause the party divide. it happens in phases tobbs look at history. Especially American for a good example. Two parties will always spring up. Eventually one is replaced by another.

Offline Grif101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Male
  • Monarchist Canuck
    • PostalGRIFF101
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #54 on: November 15, 2012, 08:30:41 AM »
I don't know much about most of those monarchies you counted up, but you can't credit the Swedish and Danish monarchs for our prosperity. They don't actually do anything, they're just ornaments. You made me see how important monarchies were for one's national culture, Grif, but I'm still a hardcore democracy supporter, even though most democracies needs a good purging right now.

You might not think they do much, but what's a key aspect in any nation's prosperity?

Stability! Modern monarchies may not have much political power anymore, but they provide a rallying point for a nation to unite behind! When politicians fail their people, if their head of state is just some other politician, it doesn't exactly do much for morale. But when their head of state is a monarch, a position that actually means something, something that is a solid and permanent foundation, it inspires them! It gives people hope! It helps give people a reason to care, something to be proud of, and something to help them work for their future! It's something that inspires unity, rather than divisiness! Politicians may come and go, but the monarchy is forever!  :sorcerer:
I'm back people...


Offline killer rin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6314
  • Gender: Male
  • Unanian Innovation!
    • killerrin
    • Killerrin
    • killer rin
    • killerrin
    • View Profile
    • Killerrin Studios
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #55 on: November 15, 2012, 08:31:34 AM »
Oh, but it is!  :sorcerer:

As I stated before, I absolutely believe no government is perfect. And yet look at the majority of the republics that replaced the monarchies. Laos, Vietnam, Italy, China, Cameroon, Chad, South Africa, Congo, Libya, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Greece, Indonesia, Cambodia, India, Burma and so many others. Not exactly a good track record for republicanism. Most have gone through violent revolutions, military coups, poverty, economic depression and genocide. Was the French Revolution worth the overthrow of the monarchy? Was Robispierre and the Reign of Terror really worth it? The Second Spanish Republic, supposedly because it's a republic it was enlightened and free, but yet more people died under the Second Spanish Republic then in the entire history of the Spanish Inquisition during the Spanish Empire. The US dismembering the Dutch Empire by forcing them to grant independence to the Dutch East Indies, ended in the independent Indonesian republic going throw civil war, poverty and economic depression, which is still going on. That's in contrast to the stable government and growing economy under Dutch rule. Decolonization, once again spearheaded by the US, was a total disaster. Almost every single independent African, Middle Eastern and Asian republic collapsed, and now they're third world excrementholes as opposed to when they were as part of the colonial empires. Even the American Revolution was a horrible affair, as the American Rebels showed absolutely no tolerance towards the Loyalists, despite espousing such things as freedom and liberty, so they kicked them out and seized their property, leaving them practically nothing. Greece and Italy are near collapse, but yet during the monarchies before, they were relatively stable and prosperous.

Now looks at today's modern monarchies. Norway, Sweden, Japan, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Monaco, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Denmark are doing pretty damn well compared to everyone else. Norway, Sweden, Luxembourg, Japan, Denmark, Canada, Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand have been hit the least hardest by the recession compared to their neighbours. Monaco is one of the wealthiest nations on the planet. Belgium right now is suffering from some growing ethnic tensions, but you know what's kept it together? The shared love and loyalty to the Belgian monarchy. The UK is going through a pretty excrementty time right now true, but if you asked anywhere there what they thought of Prime Minister Cameron, you wouldn't get very many kind words. Queen Elizabeth II? You'd get a lot of support, especially for Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge.

Look at the Caribbean nations that are still under Dutch rule. They have actual greater economic prosperity than their republican neighbours, heck they're even doing better than some of the British ones.

I'm sorry to say Necross, but republicanism is the far worse alternative to a monarchial government. All you have to do is look at world history and the present world to see I'm right.


You see Grif, your main problem with bringing Canada into that argument is that while we are technically a constitutional monarchy, the only ties to the queen we have are through symbolism only. At heart we are a fairly republican country. We don't have the queen sign off on our bills, we have a Canadian Governor General who the Prime Minister appoints  to sign the bills on her behalf.

One of the main reasons we're doing so well is because we had been on/off of recessions for the past 20 years, the latest one (not including the one we are currently on) was late 90's to early 2000's, so we just became accustomed to knowing how to deal with them. Up until now, Canadians have been fairly good at not spending within their means and ensuring that we don't fall into the credit traps as often as US citizens have; of course, I say up until now because the cockiness of "were doing better than the world" that is being propagated around the news and whatnot is causing us to do the complete opposite of what we have long been good at, and in fact household debt is starting to get to dangerous levels because of it.

« Last Edit: November 15, 2012, 08:34:20 AM by killer rin »

Offline Tobbs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8275
  • Gender: Male
  • The Space Pope
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #56 on: November 15, 2012, 08:32:10 AM »
Thats cause the party divide. it happens in phases tobbs look at history. Especially American for a good example. Two parties will always spring up. Eventually one is replaced by another.
Most democracies have more than two parties, though. Sweden has around twenty.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2012, 08:34:08 AM by Tobbs »

Keep calm and move along.

Offline LordNecross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7538
  • Gender: Male
  • The Pariah
    • SenHai
    • Sen Hai
    • SenHai
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #57 on: November 15, 2012, 08:34:05 AM »
You might not think they do much, but what's a key aspect in any nation's prosperity?

Stability! Modern monarchies may not have much political power anymore, but they provide a rallying point for a nation to unite behind! When politicians fail their people, if their head of state is just some other politician, it doesn't exactly do much for morale. But when their head of state is a monarch, a position that actually means something, something that is a solid and permanent foundation, it inspires them! It gives people hope! It helps give people a reason to care, something to be proud of, and something to help them work for their future! It's something that inspires unity, rather than divisiness! Politicians may come and go, but the monarchy is forever!  :sorcerer:
Eh, yeah but if you don't agree with the bloke then why want him to sit on his arse their? Forever is not always a good thing, good thing Monarchies aren't forever. Maybe as ornaments. as tobbs said :P

THink I will go borrow the Queen and have on my Christmas tree. I wonder does she need to be plugged in? :D

Offline killer rin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6314
  • Gender: Male
  • Unanian Innovation!
    • killerrin
    • Killerrin
    • killer rin
    • killerrin
    • View Profile
    • Killerrin Studios
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #58 on: November 15, 2012, 08:39:00 AM »
Most democracies have more than two parties, though. Sweden has around twenty.

We have 3 Major ones, 2 Moderate ones and several hundred specs on the paper

Offline Grif101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Male
  • Monarchist Canuck
    • PostalGRIFF101
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #59 on: November 15, 2012, 08:39:03 AM »
Welp all i have to really say is your system is flawed as you have stated it. Its unstable and would only be good in the short term, as Monarchies go stale. A US style Democracy while having its own problems, gives its people enough say to make change while establishing a government that can decide for its people as well.

It allows for multiple ideologies, and gives people a right to decide. A monarchy, while like a constitutional one, (Which borrows ideas from Republics to let you know), gives people rights and such, but the amount of power and privilege given to special families that really no more deserve power than the next bloke have all the say.

Also I am going based off what you said :D. With a single person given that much responsibility you have to hope each successor is a damn saint to keep the people happy, or become oppressive and make the people fear you, which I see as not preferable but it does garner control.

Now I have to say, that what is best depends on the times i can give you that, however I will say as time progresses, the need for a monarchy, as it already stands will grow less and less.

That is not to say Monarchies will die out, but Democracy in the end will rule, as the world reaches a point where cooperation between nations is necessary, One man will never be given the right to rule, and so it will come down to a global democracy in the end.

Imperialism is dead, as people who attempt such things now generally don't succeed, and that has always seemed to me to be a big part of Monarchies.

I just don't see a Monarchy as good. A Parliamentary one maybe but that is essentially only a few steps away from a republic. ;)

Here, allow me to share this article with you:

Quote
Recently I tried to highlight the absurdity of elected politicians as the best possible argument for monarchy and was rather surprised at the number of people who claimed not to understand the point I was making. I was asked again and again what a bunch of ridiculous politicians had to do with the argument of republicanism versus monarchy. I also, apparently, confused some poor souls by including the likes of Tony Blair or Gordon Brown amongst the examples as these men were both from a monarchial system. Well, allow me to try to explain the point. My starting point for this tactic was the fact that I have developed the habit of answering people who ask me why royals “deserve” their position and finery by asking, “Why do you think politicians deserve more?” It seems to me that is often a potent ‘weapon’ left unused in the monarchist arsenal. Many republics think that royals don’t “deserve” their status, their palaces or yachts. They think royals should have less but these republicans are seldom called upon to explain why they think politicians deserve more. In my experience, the dreary, ridiculous and at times downright stupid or even wicked reputation of politicians has made many otherwise lukewarm people come down on the side of monarchy when the question comes up.

It is amazing how so many people in the world are passionately loyal to the republic as an ideal while widely despising politicians in general. Bizarre as that is, the low opinion most people have for the vast majority of politicians is one of the most valuable weapons in the monarchist arsenal. Politicians are inherently divisive figures, even the most beloved and highly praised amongst them. In the United States, I doubt any president (certainly in my lifetime) has been so idolized, praised and celebrated as President Obama. Yet, roughly half the country not only does not revere him but considers him the worst president ever. President Ronald Reagan, for another example, has become near-deified by the right since his death yet in his own time, popular though he was, the left considered him a senile buffoon at best and a dangerous warmonger at worst. Franklin D. Roosevelt was popular enough to be effectively elected President-for-life yet there were people like my grandfather who considered him a disaster, that his “New Deal” was the “Raw Deal”. Politicians can only ever seem to be adored by half the populace at best or despised by all at the worst. In Britain, Margaret Thatcher is still loved by many Britons but hated by others. Politicians are simply naturally divisive and, when real power is at stake, they will not hesitate to intentionally divide the public to advance their careers.


I know, many people don’t seem to like it when I advance this argument, saying that it is somehow unfair to promote monarchy simply by saying it is better than the alternative. The bottom line though, is that it IS better than the alternative and that is the world we live in. It is worth the effort, I think, to point out to people just how unspeakably ugly republican politics can be contrast that to the beautiful tranquility of a monarchy with a monarch who can be the one pristine patch of a government otherwise devastated by scorched earth political campaigns. There will, of course, always be mud-slinging malcontents but in most monarchies at least these are a minority when it comes to the sovereign. Take the United Kingdom as an example. Most people like the Queen very much, some admire her and are greatly devoted to her and others, at least, see her as a benign and benevolent figure who does no harm to anyone and does a great deal of good for many people. She is a respected, admirable figure on the world stage. Now, compare this with the current presidential election in America in which the partisans of the President recently accused his opponent of practically killing someone. When republicans in Great Britain say that they want a republic; is this the sort of ugliness they wish to share?

Actions have consequences (how many times has that come up) and just because something may not be the “best” argument, does not make it an invalid one. I doubt most monarchists are utopians and I at least will freely admit that there has never been a perfect government and every monarchy that does or has existed has had their share of faults and imperfections. However, republicans should take a long hard look at what they are getting into before scrapping centuries of tradition and a tried and tested form of government that has worked perfectly well. One reason I could never be a utopian is the fact that humanity so often repeats the same mistakes and refuses to see facts that are right in front of them. Would the people of France who supported the Revolution have done so if they could have foreseen the “Reign of Terror” that was to follow? I doubt it, and yet, time after time a majority have returned to republicanism, closed their eyes to the facts and embraced the myth of the Revolution. In a more controversial example, how many countries have condemned the United States for intervening in their affairs who have themselves called on America for help in times of crisis, over and over again? On the whole, humanity seems fairly thick to me.


In the time of the American or French Revolutions people could at least plead ignorance. There were no other major republics in the world to compare themselves with. But after that, royalists could have posed the question, “Is the chance of a George Washington worth the risk of a Robespierre?” Today the argument is even more compelling as there have been far, far more republican leaders of the Robespierre type, many of them far worse. Additionally, most people should not have to be reminded of the likes of Mao, Stalin or Hitler to see the danger in republicanism. Everyday politicians should do the job on their own with their lies, pandering, nastiness and scandals. However, it still seems to me that the divisiveness of politicians is a better argument than even most of those. A moral failing on the part of a national leader often harms only him/herself. It looks bad but doesn’t usually harm the country as a whole itself. A country is harmed, however, when politicians so wantonly turn people against each other for their own benefit. Anything that can be used to divide people has and is being used by politicians the world over to divide them, from race to religion to how much you have in the bank. Particularly in the western world, there doesn’t seem to be much to unite people to begin with these days and politicians actively work to make existing divisions even worse by telling different groups of people that “the other guy” is their enemy.

At times it is necessary to put the grander arguments aside to reach the hoi polloi who like to think themselves practical creatures (even if they are not). And the fact is that one can have a monarch or a president and most presidents are nothing to write home about and you will immediately encounter resistance from some quarter when potential presidents are named. If politicians as a group are so despised, why reward them with an even grander office and, in some cases, vastly more powers -more than most monarchs could dream of having? The simple truth is that monarchs are prominent individuals. Everyone in the English-speaking world knows who Queen Elizabeth II is and everyone in the Spanish-speaking world knows who King Juan Carlos is. Republican leaders, on the other hand, are well known only if they hold powers that monarchs would never be allowed to have or if they get caught behaving badly. Everyone in the world knows the who Queen of Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc is but no one knows who the President of Germany or Italy is. They know who the chancellor is because she exercises political power and most knew who Berlusconi was simply because of the scandals attached to him.


The bottom line is, republicans should be forced to answer this question. It may not be the best argument, but it is a valid one. Anyone who wishes to change the structure of government should have to demonstrate how that change will be an improvement. If they want to have a president instead of a monarch, they should have to start naming some names of who they have in mind. The reason they don’t do this on their own is because they know it is a losing proposition. It has been argued that the primary reason the republican referendum in Australia failed was because there was no clear picture of what sort of system would replace the monarchy and most people, even if not avowed monarchists, decided that what they had was too good to risk on an unknown. British republicans, for example, should have to answer the question; will it be a President Brown or a President Cameron? Either answer could only increase support for the monarchy. And as for those in Canada or Australia who wish to make the Governor-General the President and keep everything otherwise as it is now, the fact should be pointed out that most people in the world have no idea who the Governor-General of Canada is, not terribly many probably know who Stephen Harper is but everyone, from America to Africa to Asia knows who the Queen is. Politicians can truly be one of the best weapons in the monarchist arsenal.
I'm back people...


Offline Grif101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Male
  • Monarchist Canuck
    • PostalGRIFF101
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #60 on: November 15, 2012, 08:42:29 AM »
You see Grif, your main problem with bringing Canada into that argument is that while we are technically a constitutional monarchy, the only ties to the queen we have are through symbolism only. At heart we are a fairly republican country. We don't have the queen sign off on our bills, we have a Canadian Governor General who the Prime Minister appoints  to sign the bills on her behalf.

One of the main reasons we're doing so well is because we had been on/off of recessions for the past 20 years, the latest one (not including the one we are currently on) was late 90's to early 2000's, so we just became accustomed to knowing how to deal with them. Up until now, Canadians have been fairly good at not spending within their means and ensuring that we don't fall into the credit traps as often as US citizens have; of course, I say up until now because the cockiness of "were doing better than the world" that is being propagated around the news and whatnot is causing us to do the complete opposite of what we have long been good at, and in fact household debt is starting to get to dangerous levels because of it.

True on that account, but if it weren't for the monarchy, we'd just be another myriad of US States. Even you can't deny the monarchy has kept us unique from the US.
I'm back people...


Offline LordNecross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7538
  • Gender: Male
  • The Pariah
    • SenHai
    • Sen Hai
    • SenHai
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #61 on: November 15, 2012, 08:44:34 AM »
Here, allow me to share this article with you:
Interesting read. doesn't really change my opinion though. I can answer who I want as president and why. I don't see the need for having royal families anymore except for histories sake. Like a museum piece.

Offline Tobbs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8275
  • Gender: Male
  • The Space Pope
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #62 on: November 15, 2012, 08:48:11 AM »
I like how serious this argument is getting. It's quite fun to watch.

This is how wars start.

Keep calm and move along.

Offline Grif101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Male
  • Monarchist Canuck
    • PostalGRIFF101
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #63 on: November 15, 2012, 08:52:27 AM »
Interesting read. doesn't really change my opinion though. I can answer who I want as president and why. I don't see the need for having royal families anymore except for histories sake. Like a museum piece.

Then let me ask you this Necross. I do not advocate returning the US to the British monarchy, or Germany to the German monarchy, or Portugal to the Portugese one etc.

I have just advocated my preference for monarchy, and why I think it is the better government. So why do insist on tearing down an institution that most citizens in monarchies have no desire to remove? Why do you insist on forcing the abolishment of all monarchies?
I'm back people...


Offline killer rin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6314
  • Gender: Male
  • Unanian Innovation!
    • killerrin
    • Killerrin
    • killer rin
    • killerrin
    • View Profile
    • Killerrin Studios
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #64 on: November 15, 2012, 08:55:35 AM »
True on that account, but if it weren't for the monarchy, we'd just be another myriad of US States. Even you can't deny the monarchy has kept us unique from the US.
Yes, but the monarchy means nothing, literally nothing. You could take away the monarchy from Canada right this second and maybe 1% of the population, if not less, would notice any difference. We're mainly different from the US because of what we did policy-wise in the 20th century to make this a better country for Canadians. We literally built the country around what we want instead of what the world wanted us to be. We wanted healthcare, so we did it. We wanted a strong social net, so we did it. We wanted anyone to be allowed to be of any religion or race, and we did it. We wanted Women to be on the same foothold as men, so we did it. We subconsciously wanted the world to see us as a country full of 'nice people' so we did that.

The monarchy is only one very tiny part of what defines us. In fact I can bet that if you went to any country in the world and asked them what defines Canada, they would either say the Freedom, the Healthcare, The kind people or the snow.

Offline Tobbs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8275
  • Gender: Male
  • The Space Pope
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #65 on: November 15, 2012, 08:58:17 AM »
Yes, but the monarchy means nothing, literally nothing. You could take away the monarchy from Canada right this second and maybe 1% of the population, if not less, would notice any difference. We're mainly different from the US because of what we did policy-wise in the 20th century to make this a better country for Canadians. We literally built the country around what we want instead of what the world wanted us to be. We wanted healthcare, so we did it. We wanted a strong social net, so we did it. We wanted anyone to be allowed to be of any religion or race, and we did it. We wanted Women to be on the same foothold as men, so we did it. We subconsciously wanted the world to see us as a country full of 'nice people' so we did that.

The monarchy is only one very tiny part of what defines us. In fact I can bet that if you went to any country in the world and asked them what defines Canada, they would either say the Freedom, the Healthcare, The kind people or the snow.
A lot of people around here that I ask think Canada has a president, by the way. I used to think that, too, but then Grif happened.

Keep calm and move along.

Offline Grif101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Male
  • Monarchist Canuck
    • PostalGRIFF101
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #66 on: November 15, 2012, 08:58:26 AM »
Yes, but the monarchy means nothing, literally nothing. You could take away the monarchy from Canada right this second and maybe 1% of the population, if not less, would notice any difference. We're mainly different from the US because of what we did policy-wise in the 20th century to make this a better country for Canadians. We literally built the country around what we want instead of what the world wanted us to be. We wanted healthcare, so we did it. We wanted a strong social net, so we did it. We wanted anyone to be allowed to be of any religion or race, and we did it. We wanted Women to be on the same foothold as men, so we did it. We subconsciously wanted the world to see us as a country full of 'nice people' so we did that.

The monarchy is only one very tiny part of what defines us. In fact I can bet that if you went to any country in the world and asked them what defines Canada, they would either say the Freedom, the Healthcare, The kind people or the snow.

I can't believe I'm reading this. You would turn your back on an institution that has served us since the very beginning? You would remove something that is part of our very cultural heritage? Does loyalty or gratitude mean anything to you Rin?
I'm back people...


Offline killer rin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6314
  • Gender: Male
  • Unanian Innovation!
    • killerrin
    • Killerrin
    • killer rin
    • killerrin
    • View Profile
    • Killerrin Studios
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #67 on: November 15, 2012, 09:03:21 AM »
I can't believe I'm reading this. You would turn your back on an institution that has served us since the very beginning? You would remove something that is part of our very cultural heritage? Does loyalty or gratitude mean anything to you Rin?
I have no clue how you came to that conclusion, I never said I was advocating removing it; just merely stating its un-importance.


A lot of people around here that I ask think Canada has a president, by the way. I used to think that, too, but then Grif happened.
See Grif, like I said; monarchy doesn't define us, and the fact that most people see us as a republic anyways just furthers my point. Its a symbol now, nothing more.

Offline Grif101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Male
  • Monarchist Canuck
    • PostalGRIFF101
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #68 on: November 15, 2012, 09:08:54 AM »
I have no clue how you came to that conclusion, I never said I was advocating removing it; just merely stating its un-importance.


See Grif, like I said; monarchy doesn't define us, and the fact that most people see us as a republic anyways just furthers my point. Its a symbol now, nothing more.

It is important Rin. There are thing's that go beyond political power or popular perception.



You can partly blame our own government and the education system for that. For some reason both institutions has been doing it's damndest to sideline and hide the monarchy.
I'm back people...


Offline Tobbs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8275
  • Gender: Male
  • The Space Pope
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #69 on: November 15, 2012, 09:16:19 AM »
It is important Rin. There are thing's that go beyond political power or popular perception.



You can partly blame our own government and the education system for that. For some reason both institutions has been doing it's damndest to sideline and hide the monarchy.
You should have been born in the medieval ages. I think you would have liked it there.

Keep calm and move along.

Offline Grif101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Male
  • Monarchist Canuck
    • PostalGRIFF101
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #70 on: November 15, 2012, 09:41:11 AM »
You should have been born in the medieval ages. I think you would have liked it there.

I would have. I would have liked the days of the British Empire better though, but I could settle for the High Medieval Age.

I have a site for you Tobbs. You may agree with it, you may not. Either way, this guy makes better arguments than I ever could. Go ahead and give Mad Monarchist a read. If it changes nothing, fair enough.

Either way, I've fought as hard as I could, at least for now. :(
I'm back people...


Offline wisekill1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
  • Gender: Male
  • Random penguins are cool!
    • wisekill1
    • wisekill1
    • wisseify
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #71 on: November 15, 2012, 12:47:17 PM »
I personally think the Dutch royal family should be given a greater responsibility in the Dutch government.
Queen Beatrix is loved by the whole country, she just returned from a trade mission to Turkey that celebrated 400 years of Dutch and Turkish relations, that single trip probaly got us tens of millions in trade deals.
I could also mention that during the time of the Libyan revolution a navy chopper was captured trying to evacuate some Dutch citizens, the Queen visited the sultan of Oman a few days later the 3 Marines were released from captivity.
...
...
...
Boo!

Offline LordNecross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7538
  • Gender: Male
  • The Pariah
    • SenHai
    • Sen Hai
    • SenHai
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #72 on: November 15, 2012, 06:37:51 PM »
Then let me ask you this Necross. I do not advocate returning the US to the British monarchy, or Germany to the German monarchy, or Portugal to the Portugese one etc.

I have just advocated my preference for monarchy, and why I think it is the better government. So why do insist on tearing down an institution that most citizens in monarchies have no desire to remove? Why do you insist on forcing the abolishment of all monarchies?
Sorry, it got a little heated there. :(

 I still don't see them as better, but honestly I don't care if their are Monarchies. I don't see them as good but as long as their nation's people as a vast majority want it, then they should keep it.

I just love me some Democracy is all :D

Offline Grif101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Male
  • Monarchist Canuck
    • PostalGRIFF101
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #73 on: November 15, 2012, 07:09:27 PM »
I personally think the Dutch royal family should be given a greater responsibility in the Dutch government.
Queen Beatrix is loved by the whole country, she just returned from a trade mission to Turkey that celebrated 400 years of Dutch and Turkish relations, that single trip probaly got us tens of millions in trade deals.
I could also mention that during the time of the Libyan revolution a navy chopper was captured trying to evacuate some Dutch citizens, the Queen visited the sultan of Oman a few days later the 3 Marines were released from captivity.

Yes, a fellow monarchist!  ;D

Big fan of Queen Beatrix myself.  ^-^

Sorry, it got a little heated there. :(

 I still don't see them as better, but honestly I don't care if their are Monarchies. I don't see them as good but as long as their nation's people as a vast majority want it, then they should keep it.

I just love me some Democracy is all :D

Fair enough, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this issue, and move on. :D
I'm back people...


Offline Tobbs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8275
  • Gender: Male
  • The Space Pope
    • View Profile
Re: PolitiCentral
« Reply #74 on: November 15, 2012, 07:13:29 PM »
Yes, a fellow monarchist!  ;D

Big fan of Queen Beatrix myself.  ^-^
I never realized the Netherlands still had a monarchy. I've always thought of it as a republic.

Keep calm and move along.