Monarchism

  • Thread starter Thread starter EphelDuath
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think one has to realize that Catholicism, historically, doesn’t care about governments in the least, only that the government permit, allow, and hopefully promote Catholicism and all that goes with it. As such, it has lent its support to some very ugly regimes.
 
Lutheranteach said:
I think one has to realize that Catholicism, historically, doesn’t care about governments in the least, only that the government permit, allow, and hopefully promote Catholicism and all that goes with it. As such, it has lent its support to some very ugly regimes.
Click to expand...
“Catholicism” isn’t one entity that has some sort of hive mind. If you mean “the Catholic Church,” then that’s a different issue altogether, since you have to deal with both the Papacy and the regional bishops of a nation.
 
The only king I’ll ever bend my knee to is the one in my signature.
 
Brennan_Doherty said:
This is an interesting Monarchy FAQ by Charles Coulombe:

angelfire.com/in3/theodore/opinion/articles/coulombe/monfaq.html

Worth reading.
Click to expand...
Yes, if only to see just how misguided some people are. For example,

***"4. Is the American Republic inherently evil?

In the sense that it was founded upon a bloody revolution, and in accordance with anti-Christian principles, yes. "***

This is the same American Republic that has done more to help the other nations of the world than any other country in the history of civilization (what nation was it that halted the Nazi advance in World War II?). Even George Bush has done more to help the people of Africa than any other political leader before him. Inherently evil? Give me a break.
 
Timothysis said:
Yes, if only to see just how misguided some people are. For example,

***"4. Is the American Republic inherently evil?

In the sense that it was founded upon a bloody revolution, and in accordance with anti-Christian principles, yes. "***

This is the same American Republic that has done more to help the other nations of the world than any other country in the history of civilization (what nation was it that halted the Nazi advance in World War II?). Even George Bush has done more to help the people of Africa than any other political leader before him. Inherently evil? Give me a break.
Click to expand...
He’s talking about the principles America was founded upon, not on our ability to wage war (which is stellar) or even our philanthropy (we are the richest nation monetarily in the history of the world thanks to our complete adherence to capitalism).
 
Brennan_Doherty said:
He’s talking about the principles America was founded upon, not on our ability to wage war (which is stellar) or even our philanthropy (we are the richest nation monetarily in the history of the world thanks to our complete adherence to capitalism).
Click to expand...
I realize that, but notice that he says the American Republic is “inherently evil,” which means, according to classic terms, that there is an absence of good in our system. It does not take much to refute such a notion. Even Pope Pius XII acknowledged that it was ok for catholics to participate in popular democracy. Does the author seriously think that in today’s world, with the advances in technology and the state of economic systems, that it is possible to go back to autocratic rule? Part of the reason for the French and Russian revolution was that autocracy was a failing system that was, most often, ran by those without the abilities to oversee the enormous bureaucracy that was necessary for the State to function. Perhaps the author would be happy being a serf, working everyday until death, carving out a nominal life for himself and his children, but I wouldn’t.
 
Timothysis said:
(what nation was it that halted the Nazi advance in World War II?)
Click to expand...
The Soviet Union. Almost single-handedly. Most of what I have read concerning the Soviet front in WWII shows that, apart from short-sighted American authors, most of the researchers writing on that particular front are in agreement that, without America’s involvement in Europe, Moscow still would have been able to march on Berlin. Albeit much later than 1945, but they still would have defeated the Nazis.

Remember, the United States also built the Nazi regime (Black and Decker, Chrysler, GE, to name a few companies that got their starts investing in Hitler’s Germany).

We cannot examine the merits of a system based on isolated instances of what one example has done. Yes, America defeated Imperial Japan in WWII. Yes Bush has done more for Africa than any president before him. Yes America succeeded with the Marshall Plan making Europe a wonderful place to live. Yes America supported Papa Doc Duvalier and his son in Haiti. Yes America supports the Saudi regime. Yes America turns a blind eye to Israel’s indiscriminate use of deadly force against the Palestinians while hyping up the Palestinians’ indiscriminate use of deadly force against the Israelis.

Do all of these points “prove” a representative democracy as inherently good or evil? No. All it shows is that the United States, which happens to be a representative democracy, has done good things and bad.

I, for one, am absolutely anti-democratic on principle because of the fundamental theory behind democracy. You cannot arm an uninformed mass of people with the power to govern themselves when they do not even understand what they’re voting on (or who they’re voting into power). Fascism, minus the inappropriate marriage of Fascism to Nazism (read up on it. Hitler denied he was a Fascist. Mussolini and Hideki Tojo also denied that Hitler’s regime was in any way to be called a Fascist one), is my ideal government. Dictatorship of a benevolent dictator. When that dictator shows that he is malevolent, the army is to step in and destroy him. The mythos of the masculine pervading Fascism lends itself to a familial relationship between government and people. Invest the leadership with immense amounts of power, but incredibly stringent punishments for ever using that power.

I suggest people read “The Coming Race” by Edward Bulwar-Litton, especially pages 55-61 in which it describes the form of government practiced by the Vril-ya. Perfect utopia, and strangely mimics the fundamental philosophies of Fascism.
 
IHeartAquinas said:
I, for one, am absolutely anti-democratic on principle because of the fundamental theory behind democracy. Fascism is my ideal government. Dictatorship of a benevolent dictator. When that dictator shows that he is malevolent, the army is to step in and destroy him.
Click to expand...
Nice. So when YOU decide that the cherished “benevolent dictator” is out of line you crush him with the army. This would go down great in Central and South America.:rolleyes:
 
I’ve always wondered if religion is not more important in America because Capitalism is the only socio-economic system with no built in moral aspect.
 
Timothysis said:
I realize that, but notice that he says the American Republic is “inherently evil,” which means, according to classic terms, that there is an absence of good in our system. It does not take much to refute such a notion. Even Pope Pius XII acknowledged that it was ok for catholics to participate in popular democracy. Does the author seriously think that in today’s world, with the advances in technology and the state of economic systems, that it is possible to go back to autocratic rule? Part of the reason for the French and Russian revolution was that autocracy was a failing system that was, most often, ran by those without the abilities to oversee the enormous bureaucracy that was necessary for the State to function. Perhaps the author would be happy being a serf, working everyday until death, carving out a nominal life for himself and his children, but I wouldn’t.
Click to expand...
Hi Timothysis,

I don’t think the author believes there is any realistic chance of us (especially the U.S.) ever becoming a monarchy. I suppose I would pit the leadership of kings and nobles with the leadership of our democracy any day. After all, if a king ran up debts he was responsible for them and people would stop lending to him and he would be bankrupting his own estates. Our politicians can run up trillions of dollars and debt and just walk away once they are out of office.

Unfortunately, with an FAQ, the author does not flesh out there what he means by the American system being inherently evil. I don’t see our system in principle tied with morality since whatever the will of the people decides on can (at least theoretically) become the law of the land. Thus we have legalized abortion and there is nothing in principle in the democratic system which can oppose it other than the will of the people.

I don’t think returning to a monarchy would suddenly mean everyone has to be a serf. There can be a functioning monarchy even in the midst of modern times.
 
Lutheranteach said:
I’ve always wondered if religion is not more important in America because Capitalism is the only socio-economic system with no built in moral aspect.
Click to expand...
Capitalism is not a comprehensive social system, so it has to be paired with one. Also, you are incorrect, it does have an innate moral aspect - certain individual rights. Capitalism demands property ownership and the right to work where one pleases.
 
dmfette said:
…peace be with you…really…

…i wonder if our democracy will ultimately be recorded as a failed endeavor as it was for the athenians…do you speak chinese?..

…peace—>mark
Click to expand...
We (the USA) do not have a democracy. We have a Constitutional Republic. Democracies ultimately fail since it turns into mob rule and the founding fathers understood this. Unfortunately we are slipping closer to a democracy which is why our entitlement system is so huge and bankrupting us.
 
dmfette said:
…peace be with you…really…

…while “capitalism” is a system of economy within social organization, it is not per se a system of government - we have seen what “god” is trusted by some and what it did to many in the u.s. in the recent economic downturn…a dangerous master is mammon…
Click to expand...
This is a fallacy. It was not capitalism that caused the down turn. It was caused by a government that artificially changed the incentives, Through the community Reinvestment Act, and implicitly insured everyone who was gambling through Fannie/Freddie. If there was a true free market capitalism banks would have not given out risky loans and people would not have bought securities composed of those risky loans since no one would bail them out. When you don’t have the freedom to fail you really are not free. The down turn was the result of American socialism: the attempt of politicians to socially engineer society.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top