Neo-Monarchy Systems? - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Any other minor ideologies.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14722054
Oh a fictional document how exciting. I have a document you signed saying that you would sell your whole pen collection imminently on ebay and give me the money but of course no copy is extant. I will eagerly await the cheque unless you are doing a direct bank transfer instead?

NNNNOOOOOOOO!!! Not my precious pens! *scoops up his vintage fountain pens and cradles them lovingly* Don't listen to him.... he doesn't mean it... my preciousssss.... :eek:
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14722058
How many do you have now?

...I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that it might incriminate me. :eh:
By Decky
#14722062
I had a maths teacher at school who collected fountain pens too. He had one he claimed to be of historical interest as it had belonged to the king of Prussia. You aren't really an Iranian maths teacher are you?
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14722064
I had a maths teacher at school who collected fountain pens too. He had one he claimed to be of historical interest as it had belonged to the king of Prussia. You aren't really an Iranian maths teacher are you?

Not that I'm aware of Decky, no. As for collecting vintage fountain pens, all I can say is that it is both hopelessly addictive and potentially ruinously expensive. When I started, I thought I could handle it. Just a single Parker 51, I thought, and then I'll stop. Just one more Pelikan 400NN, and that will do. Just that Parker 75 in sterling silver cisele, and then my collection will be complete.... Before I knew it, I had a monkey on my back. Let my suffering be a cautionary tale to others like me.... JUST SAY NO!! :eek: :*(
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14722136
It's not too many, Decky. I'm sure of it.... *starts counting his vintage pen collection*.... That's imposs-.... Oh God, I'M SO ASHAMED! *breaks down and starts weeping uncontrollably* :*(
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14722326
...Maybe. It depends how many cookies you've eaten, Cookie Monster. :eh:
By fokker
#14766241
I would like to add that a democratic system can sometimes too enjoy benefits of a monarchy - namely long term planning, stability, predictability.

A good example is Russia, despite being a non-liberal democracy. Initially people chose Yeltsin but after seeing he only broke Russia opted for Putin. He will get elected for as long as he wants as he demonstrated he puts Russian interests first and doesn't make catastrophic decision. He is also not afraid of communicating with people directly in TV. Once Putin is gone, a period of instability may follow. To me it looks like he wished Romanovs were never executed and monarchy could return to Russia.

In the west probably Germany is the only example with Angela Merkel, but with catastrophic repercussions in the future, especially due to her support of islamic immigration. She may be the person to destroy the EU.

In most countries however the problem is leaders have short term visions only and cannot maintain long term support as their policies either don't work or they are too corrupt. The democratic system allows politicians to wash their hands from responsibility. Who is responsible for the economic problems of Greece? Nobody knows who is really making decisions. In Russia you can clearly identify the responsible person as you know who is in power. In Ukraine you can keep electing different parties but the result will be the same.

In many small countries it can be a major problem to find suitable candidates for the role of president as it is the highest position that requires a revered candidate, very hard to find in countries with 5-10 million inhabitants. A monarch would fill this position very well. When speaking of monarchy I mean constitutional monarchy, not an absolutist monarchy as that system is obsolete.

As monarchy is meant to bring an element of stability, I see it as very important to apply the rule of equal marriage being required for the heir apparent, although it can be seen as incompatible with modern society. It guarantees that a "random" person cannot easily marry into royal family with intention to take over. Imagine some oligarch, celebrity, mafia or foreign secret service finding their way to marry into royal family. They should only be allowed to marry members of current or former ruling houses or they are out. I see this as the price they have to pay for being allowed to "rule" a country. I would not support a royal family that doesn't apply this rule.
Israel-Palestinian War 2023

The claim is a conditional statement. This is one[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

I don't know who are you are referring to, but th[…]

The link to the previous post is on this page. Pl[…]

That's assuming Russia isn't giving financial sup[…]