I get your point but if a dictator is too hard in those days he had limited
power to stop a truly popular uprising. When Church morality was at its
height control of Kings excesses generally was strong.
their combined debauchery through out history could ever equal todays
debauchery by just one of democracys products,Klintons escapades, Kosovo,
being one example.
Your:
"As opposed to the absolute monarch who can spend much more time accruing
cash."
True again, but you missed my point, Whilst one elected head of state has
limited time, I believe the succession of them added together because of the
urgency of their greed, would add up to a grander total of theft, Than a
succession of Monarchs, who if they keep a happy populace, have no such
urgency.
Philip Madsen.
----- Original Message -----
From: "alister air" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2000 3:15 PM
Subject: Re: THE QUEEN'S STATE VISIT TO AUSTRALIA
> At 06:43 13/01/00 -0800, Philip Madsen wrote:
> >Dion, this response of yours ignores two important considerations.
> >(a) The principle of a hereditary head of state is more stable , whether
> >benevolent or malevolent is not a factor. (though this system by its
nature
> >tends to cause the holders family to try to remain popular.)
>
> By your argument, a dictatorship is to be preferred over democracy because
> of your claim that the dictatorship would be more stable. Interestingly
> enough, the various monarchies around the world have shown themselves to
be
> unstable at the best of times. At the worst of times, their countries
were
> turned into giant slaughterhouses as one greedy megalomaniacal sadist
> fought another greedy megalomaniacal sadist who didn't disagree with the
> concept of hereditary king... just disagreed as to who's head should wear
> the crown.
>
> >(b) An elected head of state has a limited time in office, Popularity
> >becomes secondary to accrueing as much moola in the bank with the handsom
e
> >super package. Thus Corruption and control by special interests like the
> >money power, allows for the undermining of the 1st principle stability.
>
> As opposed to the absolute monarch who can spend much more time accruing
cash.
>
> Alister
>
> --
>
> "Let us not fool ourselves, half a century after the adoption
> of this Declaration (of Human Rights) and supposedly under its
> protection, millions of people have died in the world without
> reaching the age of 50 and without even knowing that there was
> a universal document that should have protected them."
> Roberto Robaina, Cuba's Foreign Minister
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general
discussion.
>
> To unsubscribe click here
Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe
> To subscribe click here
Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe
>
> For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
> For archives
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
