Join our investing community

Should A Monachial System Supercede Democracy?

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Chris C, 17th Mar, 2009.

  1. Chris C

    Chris C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    2nd Apr, 2008
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Brisbane, QLD
    Should A Monarchial System Supersede Democracy?

    Niall Ferguson - Born to rule: monarchy puts the success into succession

    Most of you know that have read a few of my posts would know that I'm not the biggest fan of democracy, I think it has a lot of very detrimental short comings, but at the same time I conceded that there aren't a lot of better alternatives out there.

    Anyway, I was reading the above article by Nial Ferguson and it highlighted to me that Monarchial rule may not be as detrimental as I once thought given that those in power have a vested interest in looking out for future generations given that their own blood stands to inherit their empire.

    This got me thinking about what Australia would look like if we had monarchial heads for each of our states and each of those monarchs ruled Australia as a council. To me that would make a very interesting alternative to the current system we have.

    What's everyone else think?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: 17th Mar, 2009
  2. Simon Hampel

    Simon Hampel Co-founder Staff Member

    Joined:
    9th Jun, 2005
    Posts:
    4,619
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    What's the difference between a monarchy and a dictatorship ?
     
  3. Chris C

    Chris C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    2nd Apr, 2008
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Brisbane, QLD
    Not a whole lot, but at the same time it's like asking what's the difference between a CEO and the owner of a private family owned company? Not a whole lot but I think the vested interests of both parties can very different. As in the CEO is just serving his term, while in the family business the owner is looking ultimately looking to pass the business onto their descendants making it more likkely that the decision maker of the family run business will act in the business long term interests in most cases.

    I should point out that when it comes to government I think there is always going to be scope for abuse of power, but I just feel that democracy in its current form is much like CEO payouts... there is limited incentive for long term performance giving rise to the opportunity for temporary governments and CEOs to try and take advantage of the power while they have it.

    In the very hypothetically Australians monarchial system I suggested you could argue that if one state monarch was to begin abusing their power over the population then the population could move to another Australian state where a more gracious state monarch ruled.

    I mean this is all very hypothetically stuff and I'm not meaning for it to be a highly serious discussion, but posing a simple idea to see what others on these forums think.
     
  4. Simon Hampel

    Simon Hampel Co-founder Staff Member

    Joined:
    9th Jun, 2005
    Posts:
    4,619
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Moving because you don't like the ruler ? Sounds like a recipe for disaster - especially when the borders get closed off to refugees (because that is what you are describing).

    Most non-democratic political systems can be justified when the best-case scenario is assumed (communism sounds fantastic on paper, beneavolent dictatorship or monarchy is fantastic when it works well, etc). The problem is that unless everyone - especially the head of state - is subject to exactly the same rule of law, then there will be abuse and a loss of liberty, it's practically guaranteed to happen.

    Monarchs in the past have had a long history of very strict enforcement of anti-sedition laws ... brutally oppressing anyone who dares to question the acts or words of the ruler.

    The only reason our society functions as well as it does is an assumption that nobody is above the law - and an assumption that the law is (as best we can manage) fairly and equitably administered.

    Democracy is not perfect - corruption is a problem everywhere - but I'm yet to see a better alternative in operation.

    Note that a figurehead monarch who rules over a democratic government is largely meaningless - and I don't have a problem with this model provided that they too are not above the law and don't have the ability to arbitrarily change the law at whim.
     
  5. Chris C

    Chris C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    2nd Apr, 2008
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Brisbane, QLD
    People do it all the time.

    I'm seriously considering residing outside of Australia given our circumstances and the direction I believe we are headed.

    Some of the best and most publicly recognised investors and advisers, like Jim Rogers and Marc Faber have publicly said on a number of occasions that they moved to Asia (Singapore) because that is where they felt the future was and because they weren't willing to go down with the sinking ships of the US and the UK.

    If I was a US citizen under the age of 30 with the ability to relocate, I would have left that country yesterday. There is no point in the innocent being left with the bill to pay the piper.

    My point is there are a lot of people that relocate their lives to pursue better circumstances.


    True. Though I'd argue that communism from my perspective blows as much on paper as it does in reality - we are not all created equal and designing a system that hinges on people accepting this flawed notion is always doomed to fail, plus it goes against our natural animal instincts.

    Rest assured that democracy have those as well. True "freedom of speech" is a myth in most democracies. Though democracies are generally a lot more tolerant.

     
  6. Billv

    Billv Getting there

    Joined:
    15th Jul, 2007
    Posts:
    1,796
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    Strong words there Chris.
    I'd rather be here.
    We stand a better chance surviving a recession here than in many other parts of the world.
     
  7. Chris C

    Chris C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    2nd Apr, 2008
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Brisbane, QLD
    Don't get me wrong, I have travelled/holiday around a far chunk of the world and I think Australia truly is a GREAT country, I'm often am glad to be heading home at the end of a long trip.

    However, policy wise Australia unfortunately is not too distant from the policies of the UK or the US, and I just think that Australia has dug itself a hole that it will spend the next decade digging itself out of, and I just feel that I personally may be better served residing elsewhere.

    Obviously my situation is somewhat different than most and I'm not in anyway recommending an exodus from Australia (I fully intend to raise my family here). I would however recommend jumping ship if you were under the age of 30 and lived in either the US or UK (I think the holes they have dug themselves into may not be able to be undug)...
     
  8. Billv

    Billv Getting there

    Joined:
    15th Jul, 2007
    Posts:
    1,796
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    I agree they are digging a big hole for us but maybe they are thinking of starting their printing press like the USA?

    Is it unfortunate that the labour government will be blamed for this mess
    when it's their fault for mismanaging our taxes?

    So far our family has received stimulous payments twice.
    Once in Xmas and again now.

    I thought that our Xmas handout (approx $2700) was very generous but the same people getting another and just as big payment now?

    What a waste of money.
    I have little confidence in their ability to manage our finances :eek:
     
  9. Chris C

    Chris C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    2nd Apr, 2008
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Brisbane, QLD
    I sincerely hope not, but if this is a long last recession, then I don't think there will be much of an alternative if the world keeps using Keynseian economic principles.

    I don't blame labour, I blame democractic governments in general in addition to the misinformed masses... that's were the blame should like, but people don't like blaming themselves so K Rudd is an easy scapegoat.

    It is a waste of money, and I'm not really happy with the way most people on these forums are handing over 30% - 40% of their incomes each year so that the vast majority of that money can be spent by government on welfare payments (41%) and health (18%) - and both of these sectors are only trending upwards.

    In the US (sorry I don't have Australian stats on this) 15% of the population pay 85% of the tax revenues to the government, I'm comfortable in assuming that the figure is somewhat similar here in Australia. With that said, I don't think it is fair as someone who intends to be (or already is) apart of that 15% that I should contribute a hell of a lot more than the average person yet not receive any benefit from government expenditure.

    As such I have to consider my alternatives places that I can reside which aren't so discriminatory, given that I'm only expecting that going forward a bigger percentage of government spending is going to go towards areas from which I get no benefit whilst the increased taxes will largely be focused on individuals like myself.