On Republics Watch

The Dictator
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
From my comment on another thread:

I'm a republican in theory but in all honesty it's our royal family in particular that I dislike.

I believe that a population has to have a certain level of education and enlightenment for a republic to be possible. Most modern-day republics are just oligarchical tyrannies in practice. The greatest republics have all been consigned to history: Rome was a republic for the better part of its history, ruled by a clique of educated and enlightened citizens. Gradually, demagogues began to seize power, appeasing the masses by buying their votes with public money, bread and circuses. Furthermore, a republican system of government was not compatible with an expanding empire and the need for a large and well-paid bureaucracy, which meant a larger, more powerful state, and a strong ruler in the mould of the Caesars. Unfortunately this meant less freedom and the disposal of the constitution which had held Rome together for centuries. Remember, the Roman Republic lasted longer than America looks like it's going to. They obviously did SOMETHING right.

Another example of a successful republic in history is Athens. Athens, like Rome, stressed civic virtue, family values, civil defence and liberty. All these things combined made it a rich and prosperous city-state for centuries, even after they lost to Sparta in the Peloponnesian War, and that was partly because they lost the very things which had made them successful - the sense of perspective and not over-reaching which ruined Rome's republican system (and I refer to the disastrous invasion of Sicily which took away a third of the male population of Athens), they scared away their best generals as they descended into a system of mob rule, ostracising successful people for fear they'd become too powerful, and of course, poor diplomacy.

I would go on to mention the Dutch Republic of the 16th and 17th centuries, which was our rival for much of the 17th century despite the help we gave to them against the Spanish. They became rich thanks to their aptitude in finance and were among the primary trading nations of Europe. The Dutch Republic, being small in land-mass and with its great dykes, was easily defensible against enemies, despite its small population, hence why, even when on the brink of disaster such as in 1672 when King Louis XIV invaded, they were able to repel enemy invaders, and they did not make the mistake of over-extending, maintaining their republican structure. Of course they too made mistakes which led to their downfall - poor diplomacy resulted in French invasion and the downfall of the champions of the Republic, the De Witt brothers, which resulted in the rise of the Orangist faction and the advance towards a monarchist system of government.

I would go on to mention other successful republics - the Italian republics for example, and even the Commonwealth of England, which would have been maintained had Cromwell lived. Remember, we only still have a monarchy by chance. Once a strong leader was no longer on the scene, the natural response was to restore the monarchy. Look at the Latin American countries, in particular Mexico, and how the turmoil there led to the cry for a monarch again - in the person of de Iturbide, who, being no Charles II, and being heavily dependent on his armed forces rather than the hearts and minds of his people, fell from power as quickly as he had won it. Charles was just a lucky ruler, and his cleverness at keeping power is why we are a monarchy today. If, say, his brother James had been King first however...
0
reply
flamboy
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
the worst reason to keep the monarchy is the myth of money from tourism in my opinion
the palaces will still be here if the queen stays queen or not
the runner-up stupid reason is "the queen's land revenues gives our government money"
the government can take that land back if it really wants to and can stop the queen being a middle-man
0
reply
The_Mighty_Bush
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
The American republic lasted about 3 decades. It wasn't long before it turned into a democracy.

There have been notable successful republics in history as you accurately pointed out. However monarchy will always be a superior form of government because they are less likely to degenerate into democracies. Monarchy in practice does not mean one man rule. No monarch can be successful if he entirely ignores his nation's aristocracy. This means that you can have the best of both worlds in a monarchy by having the collective decision making among the most civilised classes that you get in a republic with a strong safeguard against the disaster of democracy. Not to mention that monarchy usually also has a stronger religious element to it which is useful for inspiring loyalty, encouraging cultural cohesion and promoting moral behaviour.
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
(Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
The American republic lasted about 3 decades. It wasn't long before it turned into a democracy.

There have been notable successful republics in history as you accurately pointed out. However monarchy will always be a superior form of government because they are less likely to degenerate into democracies. Monarchy in practice does not mean one man rule. No monarch can be successful if he entirely ignores his nation's aristocracy. This means that you can have the best of both worlds in a monarchy by having the collective decision making among the most civilised classes that you get in a republic with a strong safeguard against the disaster of democracy. Not to mention that monarchy usually also has a stronger religious element to it which is useful for inspiring loyalty, encouraging cultural cohesion and promoting moral behaviour.
So you basically prefer one system of oligarchy and plutocracy over an other. The're both ****. Also isn't that distinguishable from a red bureaucracy either. For some who hates that sickle and hammer so much you sure share a lot of the traits of communists.
0
reply
The Dictator
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
So you basically prefer one system of oligarchy and plutocracy over an other. The're both ****. Also isn't that distinguishable from a red bureaucracy either. For some who hates that sickle and hammer so much you sure share a lot of the traits of communists.
Tbh I prefer both those systems to democracy...
0
reply
Mpagtches
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
Read Cicero.
Don't ask me why; just do it.
0
reply
The Dictator
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#7
(Original post by Mpagtches)
Read Cicero.
Don't ask me why; just do it.
Will do.
0
reply
The_Mighty_Bush
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
So you basically prefer one system of oligarchy and plutocracy over an other. The're both ****. Also isn't that distinguishable from a red bureaucracy either. For some who hates that sickle and hammer so much you sure share a lot of the traits of communists.
Communists are rootless egalitarians. The communist bureaucracy is nothing like a real aristocracy because of the evil they believe in and because they aren't a warrior class and they are uncivilised. Oligarchy is inevitable. Doesn't matter what the pretense of the society, there will always be people on top because human beings are unequal. I prefer my rulers to be noble, to not be socialists or highly ideological and to have open legitimate authority rather than backround power with some facade over the top.

Also you are making some seriously faulty conflations here. An non-democratic government that largely leaves you alone and only takes 5% or less of your income in taxation is not tyrannical while a communist government that doesn't even let you own private property and forces its way into every aspect of your communities life is tyrannical. A non-democratic government like that is also usually better than our modern socialist democratic governments that have 50% marginal tax rates, indoctrinate children on a large scale and do a number of things which destroy the ethnic and cultural heritage of their own people. No European monarchy in history ever behaved like our governments do.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (14)
16.09%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (6)
6.9%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (16)
18.39%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (11)
12.64%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (11)
12.64%
How can I be the best version of myself? (29)
33.33%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed