You should read a book called "Democracy: The God That Failed." It's a really fascinating book. It's written by a professor at the University of Nevada (a bastion of academic excellence? LOL). But he is essentially a Libertarian monarchist.
That sounds bizarre, but if you read his argument, it is essentially that under traditional monarchies, there is no centralized state that wields all power over citizens. People actually enjoyed more freedom under Louis XVI than under the Directorate that followed in the French Revolution. Modern republics/democracies are more intrusive and more restrictive than any monarchy ever was.
The point is basically have a monarch and forget about pretend republics with voting that is essentially a popularity contest. Preserve and enshrine individual freedom and property rights. Focus on that rather than "political freedom" which is fake and illusory.
I forget if he mentioned the case of the UAE, but this is essentially a model. The Emirs have all the power in the UAE. There are no elections. But the people are given absolute personal freedom, at least in Dubai and Abu Dhabi, and the economy is free market capitalism. It's one of the most successful countries on earth with this model.
Definitely check it out. The paperback version is expensive, but worth it. I bought a used copy. You can also find it online via torrents but that is of course illegal and up to you whether you think it's morally permissible.
Sorry that I forgot to follow up to your point. The UAE example was not a major part of the book's thesis, and I can't even recall if the example made it into the book; I may have been conflating the book's arguments (which were mostly European-based) with my own thoughts on the matter.
The UAE most certainly treats workers poorly, and outside of Dubai and Abu Dhabi (i.e. in Sharjah, etc) women are treated the same as in Saudi Arabia. I am not sure about your argument regarding Christians, because Dubai built 4 churches for Christians about 10 years ago, which were the first churches on the Arabian peninsula since Mohammad closed the existing ones in the 640s.
Also, UAE makes a big distinction between its own citizens and foreign workers, so perhaps I should have been more clear in my argument, that for actual citizens of the country, it is a rather great place to live given the economic freedom available to its citizens.
Thanks for the recommendation, pede! I haven't heard of this book but I have heard this argument on a few occasions—most frequently from leftist libertarians/anarchists, who like to point out that feudal serfs had better work-life balance and less immediate governmental intervention in their lives than the modern office worker in America. Nonetheless, I'm interested in the subject matter and will search my library for a copy. If that doesn't work, I'll take to the web...
My issue with the notion of a "fire and forget" ruler is that it's essentially impossible to "preserve and enshrine individual freedoms and property rights" when those rights are subject to be discarded by a monarch's/despot's whim. Of course, you can make a similar argument about democracy and the "tyranny of the majority," but the simple fact is that power distributed between hundreds of representatives (or millions of people) is harder to wield than power held by a single person. And when it comes to power over my life and my rights, I want it to be as unwieldy as possible.
Ultimately, I'm interested in decentralizing power and reducing the concentration of power across unnecessary hierarchies. I voted for Trump because he's the best candidate for states' rights, and in America, states' rights seem to be our best bet for decentralizing power. Frankly, if I wanted to live under a monarch, I'd prefer someone who acts with a bit more dignity (a bit more kingly, if you will).
No matter what, the coming weeks are going to be interesting!
Sorry that I forgot to reply. If you absolutely can't find it (try interlibrary loan, though; that system is still around, and it is great; I get books at my public library from university libraries that way, and it's free!) but you are willing to get it bootleg, send me a private message and I will "help you out" with that...
To be clear, I'm not for a total despot system. I want there to be some form of constitution and an independent judiciary.
I agree with you about the dignity. I support Trump because he gives it to the media and does what's right regardless of the consequences, but he's a disruptor. I would expect if Don Jr took over afterward, that Don Jr would be more stately.
You should read a book called "Democracy: The God That Failed." It's a really fascinating book. It's written by a professor at the University of Nevada (a bastion of academic excellence? LOL). But he is essentially a Libertarian monarchist.
That sounds bizarre, but if you read his argument, it is essentially that under traditional monarchies, there is no centralized state that wields all power over citizens. People actually enjoyed more freedom under Louis XVI than under the Directorate that followed in the French Revolution. Modern republics/democracies are more intrusive and more restrictive than any monarchy ever was.
The point is basically have a monarch and forget about pretend republics with voting that is essentially a popularity contest. Preserve and enshrine individual freedom and property rights. Focus on that rather than "political freedom" which is fake and illusory.
I forget if he mentioned the case of the UAE, but this is essentially a model. The Emirs have all the power in the UAE. There are no elections. But the people are given absolute personal freedom, at least in Dubai and Abu Dhabi, and the economy is free market capitalism. It's one of the most successful countries on earth with this model.
Definitely check it out. The paperback version is expensive, but worth it. I bought a used copy. You can also find it online via torrents but that is of course illegal and up to you whether you think it's morally permissible.
Sorry that I forgot to follow up to your point. The UAE example was not a major part of the book's thesis, and I can't even recall if the example made it into the book; I may have been conflating the book's arguments (which were mostly European-based) with my own thoughts on the matter.
The UAE most certainly treats workers poorly, and outside of Dubai and Abu Dhabi (i.e. in Sharjah, etc) women are treated the same as in Saudi Arabia. I am not sure about your argument regarding Christians, because Dubai built 4 churches for Christians about 10 years ago, which were the first churches on the Arabian peninsula since Mohammad closed the existing ones in the 640s.
Also, UAE makes a big distinction between its own citizens and foreign workers, so perhaps I should have been more clear in my argument, that for actual citizens of the country, it is a rather great place to live given the economic freedom available to its citizens.
Of course, I would rather live in the USA.
Thanks for the recommendation, pede! I haven't heard of this book but I have heard this argument on a few occasions—most frequently from leftist libertarians/anarchists, who like to point out that feudal serfs had better work-life balance and less immediate governmental intervention in their lives than the modern office worker in America. Nonetheless, I'm interested in the subject matter and will search my library for a copy. If that doesn't work, I'll take to the web...
My issue with the notion of a "fire and forget" ruler is that it's essentially impossible to "preserve and enshrine individual freedoms and property rights" when those rights are subject to be discarded by a monarch's/despot's whim. Of course, you can make a similar argument about democracy and the "tyranny of the majority," but the simple fact is that power distributed between hundreds of representatives (or millions of people) is harder to wield than power held by a single person. And when it comes to power over my life and my rights, I want it to be as unwieldy as possible.
Ultimately, I'm interested in decentralizing power and reducing the concentration of power across unnecessary hierarchies. I voted for Trump because he's the best candidate for states' rights, and in America, states' rights seem to be our best bet for decentralizing power. Frankly, if I wanted to live under a monarch, I'd prefer someone who acts with a bit more dignity (a bit more kingly, if you will).
No matter what, the coming weeks are going to be interesting!
Sorry that I forgot to reply. If you absolutely can't find it (try interlibrary loan, though; that system is still around, and it is great; I get books at my public library from university libraries that way, and it's free!) but you are willing to get it bootleg, send me a private message and I will "help you out" with that...
To be clear, I'm not for a total despot system. I want there to be some form of constitution and an independent judiciary.
I agree with you about the dignity. I support Trump because he gives it to the media and does what's right regardless of the consequences, but he's a disruptor. I would expect if Don Jr took over afterward, that Don Jr would be more stately.