Save Western Civilization > Save Europe
Interdisciplinary Symposium on Monarchy in September
Ulli:
--- Quote from: Zelhar on June 15, 2008, 11:04:49 AM ---Why do you need these monarchs anyway, what good would they bring?
--- End quote ---
One point is that a real free market economy is not possible in a democracy.
In a democracy are everytime agitators who promise the people to steal money from the working people and give it to the lazy in exchange for votes.
In my oppinion Hitler was no exception of the rule. He murdered and robbed the Jews and gave the businesses, real estate and money to his followers.
In ancient Greece, in ancient Rome and in the last two hundred years - in every democracy you have this phenomenon. This two civilisations became through this weaker and weaker. In Rom i.e. you have in the late time only lazy welfare people who were greedy towards bread and games. The minority of hard working people were taxed to death.
I think we need to "end history", through ending politics as we know them. We need a new constitution with fundamental rights of the citizens and a limited democracy, where only people which pay taxes can vote and are able to be elected. This ideal state has in my oppinion only limited functions, like law and order, defense, traffic network (waterway, railway and road), perhaps an elementary school system but no welfare, public health, universities etc.
You need an institution abouve this limeted democracy to garantee the rights of the citizens and to make the free market economy work.
This can be in my oppinion a king or some sort of council. This institution needs an own army, police and intelligence service to enforce the constitution in it's whole scope.
You can controll this executive by some sort of senat.
P.S.: This is only my personal oppinion - This is perhaps not the oppinion of the vast majority of monarchist movement.
Harzel:
--- Quote ---P.S.: This is only my personal oppinion - This is perhaps not the oppinion of the vast majority of monarchist movement.
--- End quote ---
Yes I reckon not, they simply try to reinstate the monarch as a figurehead, like the Queen of Holland.
I think your idea of limited democracy is very flawed. Great nations must have Fraternity, Equality and Liberty (At list the French revolutionaries had the right slogan if not the intention). Without fraternity the society becomes too cruel to weak and unfortunate persons, it lacks moral and compassion and its citizens become too selfish. That is why the government has to make sure that proper health care and education is provided to the citizens.
In Ancient Athene 10% were citizens and perhaps 50% were slaves, so this is not a real democracy. The late Imperial Rome (the western half) was basically plundered by the legions- the legions controlled it by their might and the law was disregarded.
I think that Democracy is the best government possible. The next to best is an authoritarian regime like the one in Singapore. However if all the great nations in the world became like Singapore the result would be stagnation.
I think that the most important ingredient is to have some sort of homogeneity, or at list national unity. I think that basically any model would fail if a great portion of the population comprises a hostile parasitic element. There is no way around this root problem, it must be approached directly.
Ulli:
I am in favour of liberty and equality, but not so much of fraternity.
Fraternity is imo something you grant only special people.
For you as a Jew is it much easier, because your peoples are at the same time members of your religion and you live in the Jewish state. This would be the same if I would live in Genf of the 16th century ;)
For me as a Calvinist Christian is there nothing like society. There is only the church-community and perhaps outside today a few brothers in faith and some friends, but then is there beneath this only the gouvernmental-authority. The less the gouvernment is acting on social, educational and society issues, the more free I am in business and religion.
The greatest danger I personally see is too much fraternity.
I don't meant with my Athen example the slaves, but the poor people (free citizens) who became there like in Rome more and more powerfull because of their votes.
The most successfull agitators during all times became Tyrants who brought great suffering and war over the people.
Example for Athen: Peisistratos
Example for Rome: Julius Caesar
Example for France: Napoleon
Example for Russia: Lenin
And homogenity is no guarantee for a prosperous state, because look to Sweden.
In the second half of the 20th century it was the most evil socialist welfare state in Europe and there lived until 1990 nearly no foreigner in it.
Then smelled the Muzzies the welfare and like the rodent to the cheese ... :(
But it is the same all over Europe. Socialism is assisting evil. Without this free healthcare, free education and welfare systems we would not have the Muzzie problem.
Harzel:
The Agitators are evil people who exploit democracy in order to take over, and then they destroy it. So the state has to be strong enough to resist such a thing. It is interesting that homogeneity is not a guaranty against agitators as the case that you brought up. However the common theme in all these societies was social instability and class wars. There was no fraternity between people of different classes. Also in the case of Wiemar Republic it was a very unstable and weak state and not a real democracy albeit it was ultra liberal and degenerate so Hitler and the Nazis had the perfect habitat to germinate.
I think that Sweden, excluding the Muslim immigrants, is a very good model for a state. They have a prosperous society which long term economical growth and very good services to all citizens. Of course the Swedish model is going to collapse because of the growing parasitic elements in Sweden- the Muslim immigrants. They are not Swedes, they came there to suck the bone marrow of the hard working people and when they are done with them they would turn Sweden into yet another sharia hell whole. There is no fraternity between ethnic Swedes and Muslims parasites.
As a Jew fraternity with my fellow Jews is ingrained in me, it is not optional, this is part of being Jew- the mutual guaranty, the love for Israel. However I think fraternity is required from any nation. Because it provides the national unity that is required for example- when the need rise for the citizens to bear arms and fight for the defense of their nation.
Ulli:
--- Quote from: Zelhar on June 15, 2008, 01:43:26 PM ---The Agitators are evil people who exploit democracy in order to take over, and then they destroy it. So the state has to be strong enough to resist such a thing. It is interesting that homogeneity is not a guaranty against agitators as the case that you brought up. However the common theme in all these societies was social instability and class wars. There was no fraternity between people of different classes. Also in the case of Wiemar Republic it was a very unstable and weak state and not a real democracy albeit it was ultra liberal and degenerate so Hitler and the Nazis had the perfect habitat to germinate.
I think that Sweden, excluding the Muslim immigrants, is a very good model for a state. They have a prosperous society which long term economical growth and very good services to all citizens. Of course the Swedish model is going to collapse because of the growing parasitic elements in Sweden- the Muslim immigrants. They are not Swedes, they came there to suck the bone marrow of the hard working people and when they are done with them they would turn Sweden into yet another sharia hell whole. There is no fraternity between ethnic Swedes and Muslims parasites.
As a Jew fraternity with my fellow Jews is ingrained in me, it is not optional, this is part of being Jew- the mutual guaranty, the love for Israel. However I think fraternity is required from any nation. Because it provides the national unity that is required for example- when the need rise for the citizens to bear arms and fight for the defense of their nation.
--- End quote ---
I have learned a new word: ingrain :)
and I feel you: It is a pleasure to be a Jew O0
But with the exception of Israel because of the special constellation of people and religion where I agree with you of community = society,
I can only agree to differ with you on my state. ;)
If I would be in charge I would implement a combination of law & order and the purest form of Manchester Capitalism. This will bring the lazybones in motion and the Muslimes will be looking for another pasture to graze. ;D
I think too the hard work will restore moral and family values again and will bring selfrespect to the people again. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version