Monarchy vs. Democracy: Are Both Obsolete?

Cooper said:
^ During the cultural Revolution, Xi was sent to a reeducation camp as a teenager, his father was imprisoned for over a decade, his sister driven to suicide. He hails from a prominent Xi'an family. Xi'an is the ancient capital of China and the cradle of Chinese civilization. He is a nationalist thru and thru. I have yet to meet a young Chinese mainlander who doesn't feel that their government is working for them.
Click to expand...
Yes but everything is in the lens of the CCP. So again, he doesnt care if millions of his fellow chinese live or die or whatever. It's a form of nationalism but not in the sense that we might associate here in the US.

I dont know what this means as far as how many mainlanders you've met ect.... I've got experience with the Chinese too. They are so heavily surveilled in every aspect of their lives and its inculcated into their culture. They also actively go out of their way to NOT criticize the government. Even when here in the US.... SO .... I dont necessarily take their "praise" of the CCP as a factual assessment.

I am sure that they are better off than they were pre-Bush favored nation status... but I'm not sure that's because of the CCP necessarily.
 
Get2choppaaa said:
Yes but everything is in the lens of the CCP. So again, he doesnt care if millions of his fellow chinese live or die or whatever. It's a form of nationalism but not in the sense that we might associate here in the US.

I dont know what this means as far as how many mainlanders you've met ect.... I've got experience with the Chinese too. They are so heavily surveilled in every aspect of their lives and its inculcated into their culture. They also actively go out of their way to NOT criticize the government. Even when here in the US.... SO .... I dont necessarily take their "praise" of the CCP as a factual assessment.

I am sure that they are better off than they were pre-Bush favored nation status... but I'm not sure that's because of the CCP necessarily.
Click to expand...

How many Uniparty Congressmen, Senators or Biden/Trump cabinet members actually care about the 100,000+ young Americans dying from fentanyl every year, or hundreds of millions being screwed by big pharma, paying for Israeli endless wars, getting debt-raped trying to go to college, or getting screwed by inflation because their legislators print trillions for their bankster bosses?

Can you even imagine something like this ever being done by elected US officials:
 
Cooper said:
How many Uniparty Congressmen, Senators or Biden/Trump cabinet members actually care about the 100,000+ young Americans dying from fentanyl every year, or hundreds of millions being screwed by big pharma, paying for Israeli endless wars, getting debt-raped trying to go to college, or getting screwed by inflation because their legislators print trillions for their bankster bosses?

Can you even imagine something like this ever being done by elected US officials:
Click to expand...

You're joking right? The same China that forces a social credit score onto their citizens is supposedly concerned with the people than any other governement?

All governements are about control over their population. The point with American democracy over an oligarchy like china is that the people have ability to make impact into their future directly through action. Compare that to the CCP.

But further to your post... People choose to go to college and choose to get the debt. If you're smart you get a scholarship or use the military. Yes college debt is a mess, but its a personal choice to take on. No one is forcing anyone to take on 100K in debt. I used academic and military scholarships for undergrad and the GI bill for grad school.... that option is available to everyone.

See meme


You're going down a rabbit hole on the on monetary policy.... China's not exactly got a good tract record with being transparent about their financial situation.... There is also economic issues in china right now going on because of the ramifications of the zero tolerance covid policy AND low trust in the current economy.



 
Last edited:
Get2choppaaa said:
You're joking right? The same China that forces a social credit score onto their citizens is supposedly concerned with the people than any other governement?

All governements are about control over their population. The point with American democracy over an oligarchy like china is that the people have ability to make impact into their future directly through action. Compare that to the CCP.

But further to your post... People choose to go to college and choose to get the debt. If you're smart you get a scholarship or use the military. Yes college debt is a mess, but its a personal choice to take on. No one is forcing anyone to take on 100K in debt. I used academic and military scholarships for undergrad and the GI bill for grad school.... that option is available to everyone.
Click to expand...

Yeah so you can pay for college by fighting the next war for Israel - that doesn't sound like a great deal to me.

Why is it the US about the only country in the world where students have to take on incredible debt or fight wars just to be able to attend college?? Is it because the usury banksters own this country?

You also believe that we have a democracy in America, and not an oligarchy, I will disagree on that too.

You're going down a rabbit hole on the on monetary policy.... China's not exactly got a good tract record with being transparent about their financial situation.... There is also economic issues in china right now going on because of the ramifications of the zero tolerance covid policy AND low trust in the current economy.



Click to expand...

As long as China's manufacturing sector remains strong, they will have no serious long-term economic issues, and their middle class will keep growing, their purchasing power continue to rise. This is the big picture of the Chinese economy, the rest are details and red herrings:

1704140139147.webp

And these are pure fantasy:

1704140278340.webp
^Published in 2001! Still waiting.

1704140305038.webp
1704140326212.webp

And the 3 links you've posted above are all from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), an NGO funded by Bill Gates, Soros, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Atomics and the US govt.

 
Cooper said:
Yeah so you can pay for college by fighting the next war for Israel - that doesn't sound like a great deal to me.

Why is it the US about the only country in the world where students have to take on incredible debt or fight wars just to be able to attend college?? Is it because the usury banksters own this country?
Click to expand...
I dunno... I had a pretty good time. Got some amazing life skills, launched my civilian career very positively forward ahead of most peers and was surrounded by brilliant critical thinkers in the Marine Corps... Wasn't a bad deal for me...infact I came out way on top. ....and I've actually gotten some life experiences out of it for perspective. I got a college degree from an excellent school for only 10k and completing an MBA from a top 50 business school while getting paid a stipend. It was well worth it.

You could always do the coast guard.

The issue with college prices is the fact that student loans are not able to be forgive by bankruptcy and thus incentives exist for prices of tuition to go up..

Look, I've got 6 kids. I'm expect some of them to go to college. Those that do will get whatever help they can from me, but I've told them get an academic/sport/FFA scholarship or join the military. That's what they need to do so they don't ruin their adult life with debt...

We can talk about fixing the student loan system but that requires government to do(fyi the credit card and student loans issue was pushed by BIden over the last 30 years as a senator)
Cooper said:
You also believe that we have a democracy in America, and not an oligarchy, I will disagree on that too.
Click to expand...
It's certainly not perfect and trending more on the oligarchy vs democratic republic it was founded upon. I do agree.

But we still have more freedoms by and large here than anywhere else...where you can raise big capital and live comfortably.
Cooper said:
As long as China's manufacturing sector remains strong, they will have no serious long-term economic issues, and their middle class will keep growing, their purchasing power continue to rise. This is the big picture of the Chinese economy, the rest are details and red herrings:

View attachment 3429

And these are pure fantasy:

View attachment 3430
^Published in 2001! Still waiting.

View attachment 3431
View attachment 3432

And the 3 links you've posted above are all from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), an NGO funded by Bill Gates, Soros, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Atomics and the US govt.

Click to expand...
Yes there are huge issues with US offshoring manufacturing.

It's against strategic security interest to do that and we need policies that will bring them back.

That said....So are you saying that China isn't having economic troubles?

They have a very very high youth unemployment (21 percent or so)

How's that working for the central planners on Bejing.

The reason China is so successful is cheap labor, corrupt business practices, and the US screwing the pooch from Clinton on with them and allowing them to exploit favored nation status.

I'm not saying china is going anywhere. I am saying that their economy is suffering too currently.
 
Ironically, the reason they are having youth unemployment problems is because they have massively boosted access to college education and graduate school:

For decades now, the Chinese government has encouraged university enrollment, pushing the number of students in higher education from 22 million in 1990 to 383 million in 2021. During the pandemic, it pressed even harder, expanding graduate-school capacity. Master’s-degree candidates rose by 25 percent in 2021. China’s Ministry of Education estimated that 10.76 million college students would graduate in 2022, 1.67 million more than in 2021—and it expects a further large rise in 2023.
Click to expand...

Looking closer at china's demography, their youth unemployment issues are going to recede as the number of young people goes down and the number of retirees increases significantly.

China is no longer a cheap labor center, they are just efficient at manufacturing, the same way the Japanese and Koreans are.

Agreed on Clinton and the globalists offshoring being a root problem.
 
Cooper said:
Ironically, the reason they are having youth unemployment problems is because they have massively boosted access to college education and graduate school:



Looking closer at china's demography, their youth unemployment issues are going to recede as the number of young people goes down and the number of retirees increases significantly.

China is no longer a cheap labor center, they are just efficient at manufacturing, the same way the Japanese and Koreans are.

Agreed on Clinton and the globalists offshoring being a root problem.
Click to expand...
Well that's the CFR's take at least ;) but I think that's fair.

Side note.. it's a little ironic given the guff about the CSIS posts to turn around and post the CFR blog when both are heavily funded by the same NGOs/ Rockefeller Org.. ;)


Last year in the Global Business Strategy class the Huawei chief security officer and spokesman Andy Purdy was one of our lectures....so I've gotten both sides (an American and former attny general...turned Chinese corporation spokesman) his entire speech was about couching the Huawei brand with positive ESG elements AND pointing out American hypocrisy... Being that he regularly gives this speech to Top Grad School students regularly... It's clear that the strategy of China is to engage in subversive PR here in the US while gaining support among companies and media.

Our Program director at my my Business School is a China expert and very strongly anti CCP. I tend to agree with his sentiment for the most part... (He's not MAGA guy buy any means and is absolutely Biden voter....)



Quote
What I believe they want, and will eventually demand as surely as the sun rises, is for foreign banks to favorably represent and support their nationalist narratives and policies back at home. U.S. banks are the perfect vehicle for Beijing to achieve these aims since the financial sector has tremendous lobbying power in Washington and is by far the largest source of campaign donations to political parties and candidates.

End Quote

Also note the "cram schooling" model and read below article if you're interested.

 
@holgerdanske :
Store nyheder -
Søndag ettermiddag abdiserte dronning Margrethe (83), og hennes sønn kronprins Frederik (55) er blitt konge av Danmark.
Denmark has a new king Frederik after the queen Margrethe the 2nd abdicated after 52 years on the throne :
Enormous crowds were out to watch the royal parade. Some monarchies still around. I wonder how much the Danish monarch gets to influence the politics if at all, or if it is all just pomp and ceremony.
 
Cooper said:
The best-run governments and best leaders in modern times, like Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew, Putin or even Xi are quasi monarchs of their countries. The only aspect diverging from monarchy is that there is no hereditary aspect to their rule.

The main thing these rulers have is that
-they genuinely care about their people, and strive to preserve their nations and national interest.
-while they are not officially tied to the church or native official religion, they work in harmony with it and protect it against neoliberalism and foreign influence.

This kind of rule is called a timocracy, defined as the rule by heads of state who are driven by a sense of national duty and honor. Note that this definition has been corrupted in modern times and conflated with plutocracy, which is the rule by the rich. Rulers under a timocracy draw their mandates by abiding by these values of personal honor and national interest. This mandate is in accordance with the state religion, thus becoming a mandate from heaven.

Plato's Republic is an excellent read on this subject, he defines the "democratic man" as an average citizen-plebe that is driven by his impulses and is thus easy to manipulate through bread and circus. His work has definitely stood the test of time.
Click to expand...

Brother, these governments are a flash in the pan and aren't proof of anything.

People have such short conceptions of mankind.

If your system cannot survive past 250 years, MINIMUM, then it's trash. People see one good leader and then declare it's the best system. Just ridiculous, zero historical perspective or understanding of human nature.

The next leaders after Putin, Lee Kuaan Yew, or Xi will all probably suck, or be mediocre, and then it's right back to the reversion to the mean.
 
Rax Moscow said:
I am firmly anti-Democracy more than I am pro any particular form of government, but it's possible that the 1700s and 1800s form of "democracy" we had would have been tolerable.
Click to expand...
If I was king Kaveman we’d be an actual republic. Anyone could vote - including women and minorities- you just need to qualify. If you’re a net tax payer, can pass the citizenship test, and can pay a simple pole tax (I don’t know why we banned pole taxes in America - stupid) you can vote for the house. You can vote for the President if you served in the military. Senate should be appointed by the states and not elected.

Before people dunk on me you won’t trust an unqualified doctor, dentist, or builder, so why should we trust unqualified voters? Universal suffrage was a mistake. I’ve bought this up and got “My ancestors came over on the mayflower!” So? I’m the words of an old meme, Git Gud
 
KulturedKaveman said:
If I was king Kaveman we’d be an actual republic. Anyone could vote - including women and minorities- you just need to qualify. If you’re a net tax payer, can pass the citizenship test, and can pay a simple pole tax (I don’t know why we banned pole taxes in America - stupid) you can vote for the house. You can vote for the President if you served in the military. Senate should be appointed by the states and not elected.

Before people dunk on me you won’t trust an unqualified doctor, dentist, or builder, so why should we trust unqualified voters? Universal suffrage was a mistake. I’ve bought this up and got “My ancestors came over on the mayflower!” So? I’m the words of an old meme, Git Gud
Click to expand...
I agree with you actually.

I like the Roman Republic model the most.

We are in the Late Roman Empire stage currently
 
SpyofMoses said:
Starship Troopers brings up a similar idea, too. Only those who've served in the military can be "citizens" with a vote. It's really not a bad idea to have those who vote prove their commitment.
Click to expand...
I had heard for a long time that the original US Constitution restricted voting to white men who owned property. However, when I went to look for this, I couldn't find it. Most search results focus on how the vote has been extended to various disadvantaged groups, and it's hard to find a link saying what the original rule was.

What I finally found says the original constitution did not specify voting rights, that it gave states the power to decide who could vote. At that time, most states restricted the vote to white male landowners.

I could accept this in modern terms with slight variations. It goes without saying that I would want to restrict the vote to men only. Instead of requiring land ownership, I would require a positive net worth of some amount that is equivalent to a plot of land. Considering the cost of land today, I think this would have to be a fairly large sum, at least $50K. That's at least the cost of a house in a depressed, low cost-of-living area. I would not place any racial limits on the vote.

I would add one final requirement that the original founders probably took for granted. I would require all voters to affirm that Christ is King.
 
SpyofMoses said:
Starship Troopers brings up a simular idea, too. Only those who've served in the military can be "citizens" with a vote. It's really not a bad idea to have those who vote prove their commitment.
Click to expand...
They go a bit too extreme imho. You can vote for the house if you’re a net tax payer and contribute to society. Like the corporate model. If I show up at a Ford shareholders meeting they’ll just go “who’s this guy?” Only people who are invested in America should vote. The President is the commander and chief. You didn’t serve so why should you get a say? Your leverage is in the house. You could have a situation where a vet on welfare can vote for the president but can’t the house. But a net tax payer who never served can vote for the house but can’t the president. Property is very different in a non agricultural economy so that’s why I think net tax system is the best. If you pay for the government to exist you should have a say in who’s in the house. If you fight, you should have a say on who the commander and chief is. Power and responsibility go hand in hand. I have no idea why America even adopted universal sufferage to be honest. It’s obvious a voting base with no skin in the game will vote themselves gibs.

It goes without saying that I would want to restrict the vote to men only.
Click to expand...
I’d be ok with women voting if they qualify. Problem is a lot won’t because they receive more money from the system than they put in. I feel most normal women care more about the benefits than having a say. So they’d rather not vote and receive more benefits than they’re taxed.

The biggest criticism I get over this system is it’s a virtual oligarchy and the wealthier Americans could fleece the poorer Americans through forcing the tax burden on them. Fine do it - but they just became net tax payers and they’re voting you out if you dare do that.
 
Last edited:
FrancisK said:
Exclude anyone receiving government assistance.
Click to expand...
That is the main goal. Couple power with responsibility. In America for the last 100 years there has been a general screaming and crying for more power, which is ok. Vox populae, vox dei. The problem is there’s been a general abdication of responsibility by those who were gifted power. We’re at the point where you need to give gifts to the populace to hold a public office. This occurred on the higher level too and not just among the room temperature IQs and lazy. This is a left wing belief I hold - Citizens United was trash. But then again I don’t think it’s a left wing belief anymore. They probably love it now because of Amazon, Apple, Meta, and Google.
 
KulturedKaveman said:
That is the main goal. Couple power with responsibility. In America for the last 100 years there has been a general screaming and crying for more power, which is ok. Vox populae, vox dei. The problem is there’s been a general abdication of responsibility by those who were gifted power. We’re at the point where you need to give gifts to the populace to hold a public office. This occurred on the higher level too and not just among the room temperature IQs and lazy. This is a left wing belief I hold - Citizens United was trash. But then again I don’t think it’s a left wing belief anymore. They probably love it now because of Amazon, Apple, Meta, and Google.
Click to expand...
It is only natural that government should be directed by the opinions of prudent, responsible people. Those who have screwed up their own lives should certainly not have a voice in the governance of others.

Rules limiting the vote to tax payers, land owners, or people who have served the public are really just filters to exclude people with poor judgment. It was an obvious mistake to expand the franchise to all adults.
 
Last edited:
I generally reject the left/right paradigm, but to the degree there has been a historical "left" vs "right" side at all historically, it can best be described as the belief in hierarchy.

Restricting group decisions to an "elite" class is an essential part of hierarchy. That may sound repulsive to many, as our elites today are universally evil. That is certainly understandable. But having decisions made by qualified, intelligent, wise men, is far preferable to having them decided by majority rule (even in a country where all people are "equal" to whatever degree that is even possible, and in an ideal world where information is truthfully presented to the masses. This is what hierarchy means. It has mostly been eliminated, with the first world war ending monarchy and the second ending Third Positionism, replaced by free market capitalism and democracy.

That said, soldiers were never part of the elite class, outside of a couple of prominent warrior societies (the exception proving the rule). The warrior society simply doesn't exist in the modern world, and anyway, the idea of 3 classes, the merchants / villagers, the warriors, and the Philosopher Kings, goes back thousands of years to before the time of Aristotle.

" I pay my taxes" is slightly more of a qualification than "I killed people in a foreign war" but neither is a very good metric by which one demonstrates wisdom and leadership. There are a number of problems with restricting decisions to paid killers and taxpayers, but just consider one that was mentioned above: restricting decisionmaking to "net taxpayers" ie those who are paying more into the system than they are getting out. Those often include the "lucky" class-ie those who didn't contract the disease that made it difficult for them to support their family, those that picked the right job that paid well, those who lived in the right areas that flourished, etc. and those types may see no need for things like job training programs, assistance to single mothers, temporary food and shelter benefits for the unemployed, etc. In other words, you are getting a skewed perspective, and it is skewed based upon the arbitrary metrics of money and killing people, which are obviously not universal goods.

And not that I consider DJT a good leader, but he'd be completely excluded as he often brags about how he uses the system to his advantage and is likely a net "taker" as are people like Warren Buffet and many of our creative minds today.

This is all just tilting at windmills though, as we are not going to get the chance to reorganize a society in the correct way from the ground up, and instead must live in this world of forced diversity and state sanctioned gayness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top