/monarchy/ - Monarchy

Past, Present, and Future

Index Catalog Archive Bottom Refresh
Mode: Reply
Name
Options
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8000

Files

Max file size: 32.00 MB

Max files: 5

Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more

Captcha
E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules

The backup domain is located at 8chan.se. .cc is a third fallback. TOR access can be found here, or you can access the TOR portal from the clearnet at Redchannit.

Miku, Yotsuba P, and Royal themes added!

8chan.moe is a hobby project with no affiliation whatsoever to the administration of any other "8chan" site, past or present.

Peasant 05/03/2020 (Sun) 04:44:04 No. 142

It's not /monarchy/ if there isn't a thread discussing succession laws.

Classical male preference primogeniture seems fine to me. Why don't you tell us what your favorite is, and why?
>>245
Not OP but. Would you tell us what would be your plan B in case of not male heir? Brother or nearest male relative I suppose.
(262.12 KB 468x600 Philippe-II-facing-left.jpg)
>>245
>Why don't you tell us what your favorite is
My favorite is hereditary/dynastic monarchy, although also adoptive heirs is also fine like they did for Julio-Claudian dynasty. My views changed a lot over the years, but that remains the same.
But yes, male-preferenced primogeniture, father-to-son. If the order of succession and law don't work well for the monarch, the absolutist stance that a monarch could choose the heir. That has a twofold history, I know, but I support it.
>and why?
There's not much a reason why. My whole stance on monarchy is like an obsession. Father-to-son monarchy speaks for a generational wisdom, shared with people, who come and go through generations. Father and son, manifestation of the same character.

Since antiquity, royal monarchs were expected to inevitably want their son to succeed them. Plato wrote about it, and so did Hobbes make the point that monarchs want to preserve their person through their offspring. Like some Medievalists pointed out, primogeniture had been an innovation, yet also hereditary succession is also an older than Medieval in terms of monarchy.
Tradcaths I've met like their electoral systems because many Catholic governments had been electoral. That takes account for the Holy Roman Empire, Poland, Venice, and the Papal Office itself. And others like electoral systems because they want more oligarchy, with the nobles electing their representative.
Ancient history has hereditary regimes like the Egyptian kingdom, united the two lands under a king, and certain Mesopotamian kings, Babylonian. In Greek city-states, royals (or tyrants) had their sons succeed them. And also for the Medieval period, Kingdom of Wessex, Rugii Kingdom, Hereditary Realm of Norway, and a large number of Byzantine Emperors would have their sons as co-emperors, like a loophole, so when they'd die–the co-emperor would succeed them.
The prominent example is with France. Philippe Auguste, although elected, started a great line of father-to-son succession. By 1,223 AD, hereditary rulers would be recognized.
>>258
This will sound like a contradiction to everything else I've said, but if other people root for the Republic of Venice, I root for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, DPRK.
I personally like North Korea, despite their rotations and socialist, democratic tradition, because their emphasis on leadership, unity behind the leader and being one with the leader, about the Lineage of Mangyongdae and of Paektu, all speak to me.
Yes, DPRK has political parties, and yes–DPRK has term limits and rotations, but a monarchist like me has never seen such emphasis on the unity and oneness of command, behind a leader like Kim Jong Un. I also like how they refer to their place as one big family, with their leaders being like a father (sometimes, they do call them that).
Certain people look at North Korea with disgust, on both sides, left and right, about the hereditary character of this leadership. A lot of people dislike the 'fatherly' character of royal monarchy.
This is coming from someone who has never voted, doesn't plan on voting, has never joined a political and hates political parties in general. Ideally, I would ban every political party…
But for each time someone points this out about DPRK, and how North Korea is like a monarchy, the more I start liking it.
>>258 Any sort of electoral system eliminates the one real advantage a monarchy has, that there's no one to corrupt in the selection process. In any democratic system, political positions are earned through corrupt behavior: lies, bribes, blackmail etc, and this ultimately ensures that the worst possible candidate nearly always wins. When a monarch is chosen purely by genetics it's a gamble, but at least there exists a possibility of a genuinely good leader coming into power even if purely by chance, and confining those chances to a royal line allows to improve those chances with both genetics and education.
(1.78 MB 800x888 elective_monarchy__poland.png)
(52.65 KB 400x444 elective_monarchy__germany.jpg)
(147.31 KB 800x888 elective_monarchy__malaysia.jpg)
Obligatory.
>>142 In all honesty, I like electoral cognatic succession in a constitutional libertarian monarchy... so that would be a constitutional libertarian monarchy with electoral cognatic succession nya~
(233.85 KB 618x960 cqUWteG3xnY.jpg)
>>980 This. Democratic monarchies are a joke.
>>980 This is why I like libertarian constitutional monarchy with electoral cognatic succession. The Empress/Queen Regnant would basically just serve as decision maker of last resort and last arbiter of justice when contracts are broken. The only democracy is when you give everyone who is a subject the right to vote for the next Queen from among the Queen's daughters. Furthermore, there would never be any question as to wether a child is illegitimate, as the monarch is female nya~
>>1457 Part of the Queen's duties as head of state would include reproducing with Eugenically high quality men. Those that possess wisdom, intelligence, beauty, and strength—in that order. Perhaps the subjects could elect men to the Queen's harem, while giving the Queen the final choice as to what man of the harem pleases her at any given moment nya~
>>1458 The members of the Queen's harem could also function as her advisors. In this way the people would have some input on the make up of the apex of society while stability is maintained nya~
>>142 Do you think it is possible that cognactic succession, electoral or not, could have been been made the law in a Kingdom... or rather 'Queendom?' Under what circumstances nya~?


Quick Reply
Extra
Delete
Report

no cookies?