The United States and Monarchy

[RoyalHighness 2002]

I'm sorry but the thought of a monarch in the U.S. seems impossible and outlandish to me. But I mean just 20 years ago know one thought a woman could be a major party nominee for the presidency so "anything" could happen I guess.

 

[Pranter]

There has been women who ran for president way before this. Somewhere along the way I think people forgot.


LaRae

 

[Al_bina]

The point stands that having a head of state above politics has many benefits!

This works in Japan because of the special religious status of Emperors. Rich barons in 1200s tried to make it work and the post-Cromwell elites made it work in the UK.

Those, who finance the politicians in the USA to protect their interests, do not believe in such figurehead. The USA has an arrangement that resembles the Malaysian model of monarchy. Power brokers convene every four years to agree on a President to be a situational figurehead. This was reinforced by the 22nd Amendment in 1947.

It is rather puzzling to see people paying attention to US election theatrics and main players' histrionics.

 

[RoyalHighness 2002]

There has been women who ran for president way before this. Somewhere along the way I think people forgot.


LaRae

Actually there has never been a woman to be the nominee for a major party for the office of president. There have been women, the most famous Victoria Woodhull, who have run to be a major party's nominee but never succeeded until Hillary.

 

[CSENYC]

This works in Japan because of the special religious status of Emperors. Rich barons in 1200s tried to make it work and the post-Cromwell elites made it work in the UK.

Those, who finance the politicians in the USA to protect their interests, do not believe in such figurehead. The USA has an arrangement that resembles the Malaysian model of monarchy. Power brokers convene every four years to agree on a President to be a situational figurehead. This was reinforced by the 22nd Amendment in 1947.

It is rather puzzling to see people paying attention to US election theatrics and main players' histrionics.

Have you ever heard of Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders?

 

[COUNTESS]

This works in Japan because of the special religious status of Emperors. Rich barons in 1200s tried to make it work and the post-Cromwell elites made it work in the UK.

Those, who finance the politicians in the USA to protect their interests, do not believe in such figurehead. The USA has an arrangement that resembles the Malaysian model of monarchy. Power brokers convene every four years to agree on a President to be a situational figurehead. This was reinforced by the 22nd Amendment in 1947.

It is rather puzzling to see people paying attention to US election theatrics and main players' histrionics.

Not quite true, but sometimes it looks like it. Bill Clinton came from very humble beginnings, as did Richard Nixon, Harry Truman. There is a lot of money spent, but the people, right or wrong pick the President. Mitt Romney was very heavily supported by the power brokers last election and he lost. The power brokers supported John Mc Cain, 2008. He lost, too. And the president is not a figurehead, otherwise he would not garner the criticism he gets. Actually, you have little understanding of the system and how the people work. Nothing in our system resembles the Malaysian Monarchy.

 

[CSENYC]

So now the US has picked its fourth deeply-polarizing president in a row.

I don't see any Constitutional changes, which would be necessary to have a non-partisan head of state, but I wonder if any significant number of people will start thinking about having one?

 

[wyevale]

now the US has picked its fourth deeply-polarising president in a row.

No sane personage would touch such a precarious, fragile role with a [VERY LONG] Barge Pole... The US seems an evenly balanced Powder Keg.

 

[COUNTESS]

We have picked some bad presidents and many good. Some bad ones turned out to be good and some good ones not so great. So be it. To have a separate head of state is ridiculous. Having a queen and her trail of family sucking up funds and doing da da, is nonsense. Having a foreign entity as head of state (Canada, Australia) seems counterproductive and will probably end with this queen. That outsiders don't understand this system is fine. We still have the strongest and healthiest economy ion the world. The strongest military and we get along, fighting each other quite well. And if someone attacks us, we gather together. No one understands this. We are large, rowdy and difficult. Benjamin Franklin said that's because we are Americans.

 

[CSENYC]

We have picked some bad presidents and many good. Some bad ones turned out to be good and some good ones not so great. So be it. To have a separate head of state is ridiculous. Having a queen and her trail of family sucking up funds and doing da da, is nonsense. Having a foreign entity as head of state (Canada, Australia) seems counterproductive and will probably end with this queen. That outsiders don't understand this system is fine. We still have the strongest and healthiest economy ion the world. The strongest military and we get along, fighting each other quite well. And if someone attacks us, we gather together. No one understands this. We are large, rowdy and difficult. Benjamin Franklin said that's because we are Americans.

If having a separate head of state is ridiculous, why do so many countries have that structure? I believe that far more countries have structures with separate heads of state than have a Presidential system like the US has.

I'm an "insider" and I don't think that the US system is fine.

The US doesn't have the strongest or healthiest economy in the world. Australia, Canada, etc. have experienced more growth, and more per-capita income growth, than the US has for quite some time; middle-class Canadians are now wealthier than middle-class Americans, for the first time in history.

We get along? That's news to me.

 

[MARG]

I am a firm believer that what is right for one country may be totally wrong for another and, I would never dare to say "we have the best" anything, because who knows where we stand on health, education, welfare, etc. against other countries in the world.

A country may be the best in the world for one thing and severely lagging behind on another.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

We have picked some bad presidents and many good. Some bad ones turned out to be good and some good ones not so great. So be it. To have a separate head of state is ridiculous. Having a queen and her trail of family sucking up funds and doing da da, is nonsense. Having a foreign entity as head of state (Canada, Australia) seems counterproductive and will probably end with this queen. That outsiders don't understand this system is fine. We still have the strongest and healthiest economy ion the world. The strongest military and we get along, fighting each other quite well. And if someone attacks us, we gather together. No one understands this. We are large, rowdy and difficult. Benjamin Franklin said that's because we are Americans.

Really he said that? Good ole Ben. I get what you're saying and understand your need to defend our country especially on this board. I feel we have the best system for us... Not every country will find such a system beneficial. We are a nation based on the idea of equality and everyone can thrive; true there have been fights that over true equality for all that has lasted centuries but the foundation is inherent in the ideals of the country. Inherited titles, inherited head of state isn't something this country wants. If we want ties to the past we build a monument; other countries prefer a living breathing monument and that's ok.
One thing the US still needs to understand is that our kind of democracy isn't best for all countries and cultures.

 

[M. Payton]

We have picked some bad presidents and many good. Some bad ones turned out to be good and some good ones not so great. So be it. To have a separate head of state is ridiculous. Having a queen and her trail of family sucking up funds and doing da da, is nonsense. Having a foreign entity as head of state (Canada, Australia) seems counterproductive and will probably end with this queen. That outsiders don't understand this system is fine. We still have the strongest and healthiest economy ion the world. The strongest military and we get along, fighting each other quite well. And if someone attacks us, we gather together. No one understands this. We are large, rowdy and difficult. Benjamin Franklin said that's because we are Americans.

All I will say about this comment is..............?????, in your dreams for so many of us are living in a nightmare and have been for decades now.....

 

[Osipi]

I've lived through many eras in modern times and have always been proud to be an American. Sometimes though, I do wish that our President and Head of State, duly elected by the people, for the people and of the people was only just that. Not a political party President or a left wing, right wing, breast or thigh politically bent President but one that for four years was apolitical when it came to the duties of his office. Today, its not the form of government that the US has that is out of whack but the people involved in it. Parties have their own agenda and with all the in fighting and the conspiracies and the machinations to "triumph" over the other side and push their agendas through, they're forgetting who they actually work for. We, the people. Take this quote from Abraham Lincoln and insert "red" for slave and "blue" for free and we have the present situation in Washington, D.C.

Its no wonder that an American citizen has written to HM, Queen Elizabeth II asking for her to take the States back.

"A house divided against itself cannot stand." I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved—I do not expect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to be divided." - Abraham Lincoln

“Then join hand in hand, brave Americans all! By uniting we stand, by dividing we fall.” - John Dickinson "The Liberty Song" 1768

 

[Mirabel]

No sane personage would touch such a precarious, fragile role with a [VERY LONG] Barge Pole... The US seems an evenly balanced Powder Keg.

Perhaps.
But, what country isn't a powder keg these days?
I can't think of any!

 

[wyevale]

The US seems an evenly balanced Powder Keg

Some have questioned this statement [by private message].. what I mean by it is that the populace votes Republican or Democrat in almost equal measure.
It wasn't a comment on the 'state of the [collective] 'mind' in the USA,

 

[Denville]

I've lived through many eras in modern times and have always been proud to be an American. Sometimes though, I do wish that our President and Head of State, duly elected by the people, for the people and of the people was only just that. Not a political party President or a left wing, right wing, breast or thigh politically bent President but one that for four years was apolitical when it came to the duties of his office. Today, its not the form of government that the US has that is out of whack but the people involved in it. Parties have their own agenda and with all the in fighting and the conspiracies and the machinations to "triumph" over the other side and push their agendas through, they're forgetting who they actually work for. We, the people. Take this quote from Abraham Lincoln and insert "red" for slave and "blue" for free and we have the present situation in Washington, D.C.

Its no wonder that an American citizen has written to HM, Queen Elizabeth II asking for her to take the States back.

"A house divided against itself cannot stand." I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved—I do not expect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to be divided." - Abraham Lincoln

“Then join hand in hand, brave Americans all! By uniting we stand, by dividing we fall.” - John Dickinson "The Liberty Song" 1768

if the President were merely a head of state, it would be a completely different system to what you have..

 

[Mbruno]

if the President were merely a head of state, it would be a completely different system to what you have..

Separating the roles of head of government and head of state and having a non-partisan head of state are good things IMHO. Having said that, however, I now lean into thinking that parliamentary government only works well when you have a de facto quasi-two-party system like in the UK. Otherwise, people vote blindly in an election without a clue of what kind of government or coalition program might emerge from it thereafter.



Furthermore, there have been several examples recently in Europe of political parties that effectively lost elections, but ended up sneaking into government thanks to "negative majorities" in parliament. That is the case, for example, of the socialists in Portugal and in Spain, who probably had some of their worst electoral results ever in recent elections, but who are in government nonetheless because the far-left or the separatist parties, despite staying nominally in opposition to the socialist government, still chose to vote down the conservatives, even when the conservatives are actually the largest party alone in number of seats. The equivalent to that in the UK would be Labour getting into government on a motion of no confidence in the conservative government backed by the SNP, Plaid Cymru, and the Irish republican parties for example.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I love reading about European monarchies and I genuinely pray that NONE of them turn into Republics anytime soon, if ever.

For myself personally? I have never ceased thanking the Lord that I was born an American. For all my humiliation and disgust at our current. .."situation" let's call it, I love this country.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I love reading about European monarchies and I genuinely pray that NONE of them turn into Republics anytime soon, if ever.

For myself personally? I have never ceased thanking the Lord that I was born an American. For all my humiliation and disgust at our current. .."situation" let's call it, I love this country.

QFT, I agree.
Speaking of political parties ; I once heard that France has a system where the 2 sides who compete to be president get the same amount of money.
I also heard there's a country that has a set up where there is no 2 party system.

 

[CSENYC]

I love reading about European monarchies and I genuinely pray that NONE of them turn into Republics anytime soon, if ever.

For myself personally? I have never ceased thanking the Lord that I was born an American. For all my humiliation and disgust at our current. .."situation" let's call it, I love this country.

I agree on the first point.


On the second: I'm a native-born American, but I think that the US has a LOT of room for improvement.

 

[Biri]

I agree on the first point.


On the second: I'm a native-born American, but I think that the US has a LOT of room for improvement.

Do you want to say you are a native American??

 

[Mirabel]

I agree on the first point.


On the second: I'm a native-born American, but I think that the US has a LOT of room for improvement.

What country doesn't have room for improvement? No Edens out there that I am aware of.

But remember that famous toast: My country, may she be always right! But, right or wrong, my country!

 

[Somebody]

It's interesting how patriotism is ingrained in each ciild in some countries (sometimes resulting in the idea that their country is the greatest nation on earth - I beg to differ), while in other countries that is not an important goal in a child's education and upbringing. Not that those countries don't appreciate their country and the good things it brings but there is far less of a mistaken sense of superiority.

 

[CSENYC]

What country doesn't have room for improvement? No Edens out there that I am aware of.

But remember that famous toast: My country, may she be always right! But, right or wrong, my country!

True for the first point. In the US, it seems as though it's almost mandatory to believe that the US is the greatest country in the world, though. I don't think that it is; it's done a lot of good in the world and its population lives well, but there are others that do a better job of producing healthy, happy and productive citizens (and aren't inhabited by Obama or Trump, who I think are two of the most odious leaders in recent memory). Sweden, Canada, Australia, etc. all come to mind.



For the second, yes, many people say that. I don't.

 

[M. Payton]

I very much agree with everything you have said here....and the one thing that gets me is that in this country not everyone is equal or has access to things that are basic human rights.....medial is a huge issue here and as is jobs going elsewhere and the way this country operates on greed.

I also have a strong issue with giving our money to foreign countries and then they do not back us when needed.....we here in the US need to fix this country first before we take on the rest of the world....ole saying...fix your home and learn to love yourself before you can love another or fix another....we learn by taking care of us first and then do for others is how I believe.

Not every president is perfect as is no human being and each and everyone has made horrible mistakes in life.....as we all have. It is a learning process I believe as even constitutional monarchies have learned for if not then they would not be there in the position they are in.

I am a strong believe in a royal family to a point, as long as they do for the country as a whole and work to make things better for the ones that need it, then that is fine with me, if it is just for them alone, get rid of them fast.

So with all that I say *Long may HM be here with us*...

 

[Moonmaiden23]

It's interesting how patriotism is ingrained in each ciild in some countries (sometimes resulting in the idea that their country is the greatest nation on earth - I beg to differ), while in other countries that is not an important goal in a child's education and upbringing. Not that those countries don't appreciate their country and the good things it brings but there is far less of a mistaken sense of superiority.

For myself, I was indeed taught the superiority of "the American way" from kindergarten and I did not question and ultimately reject the idea until well into adulthood.

I simply do not believe any one country or political system is better than another.

The nation or system that has a population that is 100% well housed, well clothed and educated and where there is absolutely NO racial, ethnic or religious intolerance does not exist and never has...one would be describing Shangri-la.

Yet I remain grateful to be an American. There is a reason immigrants have risked their very lives to come here up to the present day.

 

[Mbruno]

We have picked some bad presidents and many good. Some bad ones turned out to be good and some good ones not so great. So be it. To have a separate head of state is ridiculous. Having a queen and her trail of family sucking up funds and doing da da, is nonsense. Having a foreign entity as head of state (Canada, Australia) seems counterproductive and will probably end with this queen..

I wouldn't be so sure about your predictions for Australia and Canada following the present queen's reign. In any case, that is a matter for the Australians and the Canadians to decide.



On your other point, having a ceremonial head of state and a separate head of government is far from ridiculous. In fact, that is the case in many countries in the world, including not only constitutional monarchies, but also republics like Germany, Ireland or Italy.

Yet I remain grateful to be an American. There is a reason immigrants have risked their very lives to come here up to the present day.

The United States has many advantages over other countries, e.g. in terms of innovation, entrepreneurship and dynamism. I agree, however, with CSENYC when he/she says that there are now countries that beat the US in quality of life like Australia, the Scandinavian countries, or maybe even Canada. The US, compared to other so-called "developed countries", is also a much more unequal society where, on one hand, there is more visible poverty, but, on the other hand, there are far more billionaires and ostensive displays of wealth.

 

[Denville]

QFT, I agree.
Speaking of political parties ; I once heard that France has a system where the 2 sides who compete to be president get the same amount of money.
I also heard there's a country that has a set up where there is no 2 party system.

There are lots of countries which do not have a 2 party system.. many European countries have sitautions where multiple parties win a fair share of the vote, and get inot government. but that's nothing to do with Heads of state or monarchies...
If you have a system where there is a ceremonial head of state who does not have the Power that the American presidenet has, it has its problems and its good points. On the bad side, it costs money for someone who is largely doing ceremonial work, rather like a royal family would.... On the good side, it means that there is a head of state who is less likely to be divisive...

 

[Mirabel]

True for the first point. In the US, it seems as though it's almost mandatory to believe that the US is the greatest country in the world, though. I don't think that it is; it's done a lot of good in the world and its population lives well, but there are others that do a better job of producing healthy, happy and productive citizens (and aren't inhabited by Obama or Trump, who I think are two of the most odious leaders in recent memory). Sweden, Canada, Australia, etc. all come to mind.

Interesting! It may be that the USA is a rather unequal society compared to some other countries.
However. the countries you mention have, until recently, had a much more homogeneous population than the USA, and have also been rather critical of our policies on illegal immigration.

Yet, when I was in Canada last week, one politician was suggesting building a wall on Roxham Road, to reduce the illegal immigrant problem!!?

Sweden is coping with a crime wave that is tied to the migrant influx. Australia advocates not allowing migrants to land in the first place.


Let's see what happens in a few years.