Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Is the 21st century to be the age of New Monarchy?

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member Thac0man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kildare/Dublin
    Posts
    6,475
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Question Is the 21st century to be the age of New Monarchy?

    When I say Monarchy I do not mean Princess Di or whoever inhabits the museams of European Monarchy. But I refer to the emergance of Kings by other titles.

    Throughout the latter half of the 20th century we saw the great idiological struggle between Democracy and Communism. But when the context of the Cold War was removed in the latter years there remained many unyielding totalitarian regimes that stemmed from both sides of the Cold War.

    In the first years of this century some of those still existing regimes are undergoing, or have undergone a process of dynastic succession. In short, they resemble a true Monarchy in almost every facet but name.

    North Korea is looking at its third inaugeration of the Yung dynasty as head.

    Libya, whose leader is already self declared "King of Kings" is lining up his bloodline as heirs.

    Syrias presidancy, which rules by marshal law is in its second generation of succession.

    Azerbajan is simular to Syria.

    The Chinses Communist party is a ruing elite like no other, and its siblings dominate Chinese commerce, though there has yet to be a succession. Chinese Communism is thus now only akin to a system of serfdom for the poor.

    These are regimes (except China) where whoever holds the sucession rules supreme. There are no other candidates outside of the dynasty. They are not like the old mostly symbolic constitutional monarchies in Europe or further afield. Can it be long before these new Monarchies define themselves as exactly that, Monarchies, now that the global context in which they otherwise would have been defined has disappeared?

    With the emergance of these dynastic powers, will a template be set for some to follow which avoids the polls of democracy or socialism altogether? Will those new powers find common cause with existing actual Monarchies like Saudi Arabia thus creating another poll of world influance?

    There are many places in the world where democracy and socialism have not taken hold, like Africa, and places like there these new Dynasties have a growing influance.

    *I would exclude Cuba entirely from that short list as Cuba has yet to see another generation of the same dynasty take power.

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member Thac0man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kildare/Dublin
    Posts
    6,475
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    In light of recent and ongoing events, is this new global struggle not between Communism/Capitalism any more, but between Democracy and Monarchy?

    Since the above post (made in 2009)

    - Cuba, who is last mentioned as excluded, has experienced dynastic succession.

    - Gaddafi is gdead, and is sons dragged down with him

    - not sure of Mubarracks son was in the picture to take over the top job at the time

    - and North Korean power has passed into the hands of the 3rd generation of the same dynasty.


    ....... and just so we in Ireland don't think we can be complacent; the recent sentimental fretting over O'Cuiv possibly leaving Fianna Fail because he is Dev's grandson hints, at a respect for bloodlines amongst some who claim to be 'Republican'.
    Last edited by Thac0man; 25th July 2012 at 06:13 PM.

  3. #3

    Default

    The New monarchies are the banksters and crony capitalists that are untouchable and run governments .

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member harshreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,685
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    The next time I go to Russia I will ask King Putin what my opinion on this thread is.

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member Thac0man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kildare/Dublin
    Posts
    6,475
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fractional Reserve View Post
    The New monarchies are the banksters and crony capitalists that are untouchable and run governments .
    There have always been bankers and merchants, almost as long as there has been kings and queens. But they are not the same thing and do not inspire personal loyalty to the degree which leaders who foster personality cults do. Simularly there are I'm sure other powertful influenes behind the scenes, and behind seats of power. Your view point as regards bankers is popularist and understandable, but not accurate. Bankers cannot exist outside of or apart from the systems from which the seek to profit. Its impossible to compare Bernie Madoff, Conrad Black or Sachs to the Kims of Gaddafis. Beyond wealth, the similarity ends.

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    12,223
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Support for monarchy is rising across the world according to researchers.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member BlackLion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South-East
    Posts
    4,840
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TommyO'Brien View Post
    Support for monarchy is rising across the world according to researchers.
    Thats how bad politicians are across the board. People want strong leadership and saddly turn away from weak politicians only caring about power and money to weak kings who only care about power and dynasties. what we need is democratically elected kings.
    All men dream: but not equally. -T. E. Lawrence

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    10,004
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TommyO'Brien View Post
    Support for monarchy is rising across the world according to researchers.
    Link?

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    12,223
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radix View Post
    Link?
    Academic stuff I have from polling data passed on my a colleague who is researching the topic. (Not everyone gets their information from google searches! Some of us deal with real academic number crunching and unpublished papers!) They show across various states people perceive monarchy as offering stability and certainty and in an unstable and uncertain world it appeals to them. They perceive monarchies as offering a higher standard of ethical behaviour than is found with politics, bankers and the media and perceive monarchs are better able to serve society without self-interest.

    I wouldn't agree with the conclusions of those interviewed but it is fascinating. In some former Eastern bloc states support for reinstating monarchy is at the highest it has been since polling began. People, for example, compare the 'dignity' of ex-king Michael I of Roumania, who is in his 90s now and was invited to address parliament, with scandals involving recent Rumanian presidents.

    Even in Greece the wildly discredited ex-monarchy of ex-king Constantine II is now growing in popularity again with some Greeks feeling that whatever about his chronic misjudgements they may have made a mistake in ditching him for the Republic of Pasok and New Democracy. I cannot imagine that fool Constantine ever back on the throne, but I thought the monarchy there was dead and buried. Now the comment "it was never this bad under the king" has started to show up in qualitative research. Another comment showing up is "compared to what happened afterwards, maybe Constantine wasn't so bad after all."
    Last edited by TommyO'Brien; 26th July 2012 at 04:01 AM.

  10. #10

    Default

    The bankers own governments , the government ineptocrats issue slavery bonds , bought up by banksters and their cronies.The people are then battered in submission by taxation to pay this back .The old saying if you own someone money you are subservient to them , we see this in all countries where governments have gone nuts buying votes .
    Quote Originally Posted by Thac0man View Post
    There have always been bankers and merchants, almost as long as there has been kings and queens. But they are not the same thing and do not inspire personal loyalty to the degree which leaders who foster personality cults do. Simularly there are I'm sure other powertful influenes behind the scenes, and behind seats of power. Your view point as regards bankers is popularist and understandable, but not accurate. Bankers cannot exist outside of or apart from the systems from which the seek to profit. Its impossible to compare Bernie Madoff, Conrad Black or Sachs to the Kims of Gaddafis. Beyond wealth, the similarity ends.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •