Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-07-2014, 05:13 PM
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
(29-07-2014 05:08 PM)Res Publica Wrote:  
(29-07-2014 05:06 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Laughat



Regarding monarchs, you want to speak about republics deriving power from the masses but so do monarchies. The Queen is the Queen because the people allow her to be. Louis XVI (If I got the right dude here) lost power because the people did not allow him to keep it. Hell, even the Queen lost pretty much all her power because the people (well... the Baron's..) decided somewhere along the line that the King/Queen shouldn't have X amount of power.

The point is that yes the people vote in Presidents or Prime Ministers, but the people also allow the royal's to stay in place because of public opinion. Therefore their power is also derived from the people.

Then they should run in elections every few years to prove it.

They're royal's, not politicians.
And if you mean elections to decide if they remain royals or not you will find that you wont win because they are overwhelmingly liked and well received by the public.

So
[Image: macaca_sticking_out_tongue_by_frankylie-d320v4m.jpg]
to you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2014, 05:14 PM
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
(29-07-2014 05:08 PM)Res Publica Wrote:  Then they should run in elections every few years to prove it.

Citizens of a democratic monarchy are free to vote for republican parties whenever they wish.

You can hardly bang on about popular legitimacy when you're complaining about people not doing something they didn't vote for.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2014, 05:28 PM
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
Can I just add that the collective wealth of the royal family (the British one) is estimated to just top $1billion.
Sure, this seems like a lot but considering there are 1,645 billionaires in the world and they're on the low end of that it's not so bad.
Also consider that the US has 492 billionaires compared to UK's 47. If the issue is in regards to people inheriting a fuck-ton of cash that all they had to do was be born into than the Royal Family are hardly a concern and you're looking at the wrong continent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2014, 05:33 PM
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
(29-07-2014 04:03 PM)Res Publica Wrote:  Monarchies derive their moral legitimacy from the divine right of kings. It is impossible to prove that there is a god, let alone one who appoints kings. So from the very onset you cannot prove a monarchist government has any sort of moral legitimacy.

In a republic the government derives its moral legitimacy from popular sovereignty (the government existing and ruling by consent of the people). Popular sovereignty is proven every time a proper election is held. A republican government has provable moral sovereignty, and thus citizens have a moral obligation to follow its laws. No such obligation exists in a monarchy unless one believes in the divine right of kings.

When you say "moral legitimacy": Who decides what is moral? And would it not be the governed people or at least parts of it who had to accept a governing body or a societal institution to give it moral legitimacy?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2014, 05:37 PM
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
Democracies can be fragile but they are certainly preferable to dictatorships and theocracies.

As for The Royals: if the Brits et al see this as good, I suppose it's up to them.
IMAO it's quite farcical!Rolleyes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2014, 05:39 PM
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
(29-07-2014 05:28 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Can I just add that the collective wealth of the royal family (the British one) is estimated to just top $1billion.
Sure, this seems like a lot but considering there are 1,645 billionaires in the world and they're on the low end of that it's not so bad.
Also consider that the US has 492 billionaires compared to UK's 47. If the issue is in regards to people inheriting a fuck-ton of cash that all they had to do was be born into than the Royal Family are hardly a concern and you're looking at the wrong continent.

The inheritance question seems to be a more logical one than the royal one. As you have pointed out the British Royal family are mere figureheads and are towards the low end of the ultra rich.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2014, 05:50 PM
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
(29-07-2014 05:28 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Can I just add that the collective wealth of the royal family (the British one) is estimated to just top $1billion.
Sure, this seems like a lot but considering there are 1,645 billionaires in the world and they're on the low end of that it's not so bad.
Also consider that the US has 492 billionaires compared to UK's 47. If the issue is in regards to people inheriting a fuck-ton of cash that all they had to do was be born into than the Royal Family are hardly a concern and you're looking at the wrong continent.

We've been down this road here before, as I recall. There's also the fact that the ROI on outlaid cash is higher for the Royal family, (as PR *actors*) in Britain than any Wall Street PR firm gets for their clients per $ invested. It's a huge percentage return. It's a profitable cost center. The Royals are a very profitable PR concern. Monarchy related tourism brings in billions of bucarroos per year. It works. Would I go poke around Royal houses ? Maybe not, but lots of people want to do it.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2014, 06:02 PM
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
(29-07-2014 05:13 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(29-07-2014 05:08 PM)Res Publica Wrote:  Then they should run in elections every few years to prove it.

They're royal's, not politicians.
And if you mean elections to decide if they remain royals or not you will find that you wont win because they are overwhelmingly liked and well received by the public.

So
[Image: macaca_sticking_out_tongue_by_frankylie-d320v4m.jpg]
to you.

They should run in elections every four years, and if what you say is true they will win everytime.

Also, it doesn't matter if people want monarchs or not, in order for the state to be able to claim any moral legitimacy it must subject its leaders to elections or else there is no proof of popular sovereignty. No matter how much you claim that they are supported by the people you have absolutely no proof if you don't hold elections.

How atheists can defend a government based off supposed divine appointment is beyond me. And secular monarchies are the least moral of all, because without the divine right of kings a monarch is basically admitting that the only reason he is in power is because one of his ancestors used bigger-army diplomacy, or in other words he has as much moral legitimacy as fucking Somali dictators.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2014, 06:04 PM (This post was last modified: 29-07-2014 06:11 PM by Revenant77x.)
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
(29-07-2014 06:02 PM)Res Publica Wrote:  
(29-07-2014 05:13 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  They're royal's, not politicians.
And if you mean elections to decide if they remain royals or not you will find that you wont win because they are overwhelmingly liked and well received by the public.

So
[Image: macaca_sticking_out_tongue_by_frankylie-d320v4m.jpg]
to you.

They should run in elections every four years, and if what you say is true they will win everytime.

Also, it doesn't matter if people want monarchs or not, in order for the state to be able to claim any moral legitimacy it must subject its leaders to elections or else there is no proof of popular sovereignty. No matter how much you claim that they are supported by the people you have absolutely no proof if you don't hold elections.

How atheists can defend a government based off supposed divine appointment is beyond me. And secular monarchies are the least moral of all, because without the divine right of kings a monarch is basically admitting that the only reason he is in power is because one of his ancestors used bigger-army diplomacy, or in other words he has as much moral legitimacy as fucking Somali dictators.


Typical right winger all about freedom and choice until things don't go their way.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2014, 06:10 PM
RE: Why Monarchies have No Moral Legitimacy
(29-07-2014 05:50 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(29-07-2014 05:28 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Can I just add that the collective wealth of the royal family (the British one) is estimated to just top $1billion.
Sure, this seems like a lot but considering there are 1,645 billionaires in the world and they're on the low end of that it's not so bad.
Also consider that the US has 492 billionaires compared to UK's 47. If the issue is in regards to people inheriting a fuck-ton of cash that all they had to do was be born into than the Royal Family are hardly a concern and you're looking at the wrong continent.

We've been down this road here before, as I recall. There's also the fact that the ROI on outlaid cash is higher for the Royal family, (as PR *actors*) in Britain than any Wall Street PR firm gets for their clients per $ invested. It's a huge percentage return. It's a profitable cost center. The Royals are a very profitable PR concern. Monarchy related tourism brings in billions of bucarroos per year. It works. Would I go poke around Royal houses ? Maybe not, but lots of people want to do it.

The idea that monarchies bring in tourism money is bullshit. France, which has a strong republican tradition, is the number one tourist destination in the world. Britan's tourism brought in $17.2bn in 2010, Germany (which is a republic) tourism brings in EUR43.2bn to the national GDP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_France
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_...ed_Kingdom
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: