Kings, queens and the world government

[maisetofan]

Okay so back in the day (yeah over 450 years ago) The Monarchy was government, the king of each country was responsible for everything from distribution of money to the religious laws that were practiced

would it be better if we had that today instead of a prime minister?
america does not count, lol they never had a king or a queen

BUT would the royal families of europe be better than prime ministers?

i know its a silly ridiculous question, i just wanted to know peoples thoughts:thatface::thatface:

[AdmiralAwesome]

In my opinon, apointing someone as a learder simply on their family is a ridiculous idea

[HeartRyou]

I like the idea of monarchy with Parliament. The monarch could stand as a uniting symbol.

[HolyShadow]

America does too count. Before we became a nation, we were part of England, and therefore had a king.

Judging from everything England did with kings/queens (Not necessarily to America), I'd say that a king/queen has too much power. When one person is given all power, they will support their own interests. A fairytale king who wants the best for his country is very rare. Rather, they're likely to line their own pockets with gold on their quest for dominating everyone around them. They'll never learn the troubles of the lower class because they were never part of the lower class. In that case, they're very unlikely to actually help them at all.

Let them eat cake, after all.

[divine1]

not much to say about this. I believe the way things work now is for the best, as having an all-powerful ruler would create chaos.

[Spoofs3]

Okay so back in the day (yeah over 450 years ago) The Monarchy was government, the king of each country was responsible for everything from distribution of money to the religious laws that were practiced

would it be better if we had that today instead of a prime minister?
america does not count, lol they never had a king or a queen

BUT would the royal families of europe be better than prime ministers?

i know its a silly ridiculous question, i just wanted to know peoples thoughts:thatface::thatface:


When the King of England was in Charge of the government, He used his power to commit Genocide on the people of Ireland :thatface:

So sorry if I am a bit biased on the idea :V

otherwise, No... Terrible idea, Why else do you think all the major monarchs are GONE nowadays, The only main surviving ones that you actually hear about is like Japan and England (I think Finland Norway, Denmark and Sweden might have them aswell?)

But France... Fucked it up...
Germany? Kinda did aswell, Not really his fault
England... Fucked it up... but then got it together again... And fucked it up... And then got another king again, And now we're here, Where they are... fucking it up...

but I believe someone once said that "Democracy is a terrible system... but its the best we got"

but yeah, Maybe I am biased seeing as Monarchs seem to have killed my people (Or maybe they are good, The German Monarch organized many revolutions for the irish people, including 1916 assistance... Or maybe not because so did the French without their monarch...)

[Fat1Fared]

Spoofs 2000 innocence English settlers, who had done nothing more than be born to english names were murdered in that as well, and it wasn't genocide. Genocide is where kill everyone in area, to exterminate them and it will happen without fight or cause. What happened their was act of suppression, where 5000 Irish, joined with around 3000 French poeple and started mass murderering English poeple, in rebellion and in return, England sent in its Army, who pretty much crushed the rebellion, down to last man. I know England made lot of bad moves in Ireland to say lest, but there was another side in that story whole story.

As for Monarchs, well Spain, has them, as well as Thailand (and in Thailand, they love him) infact more countries than you may think have royal families, just lot less of them have any power

But before you smash hell out of them, most of Histories greatest leaders for royal, just so where worst ones, it can be hit and miss

But then no more than Parliaments, or other systems, the single truth is that system doesn't matter, if you give a man power, he will use it for own ends (for better or for worse)

However problem have here is, you all think that these Monarchs had Legal Supremacy in their time, they didn't, most had whole courts and legal systems with them, english Parliament can trace it history back to 1200's. Just the Kings/Queens had powers of Vito and so in most cases had final say. In England Charlies had very little legal power, however he made laws under an act which had been removed before his birth and because of long and silly reason, they were upheld>WTF (Bascially he controlled judges and told parliament when to met up)

And even in the states, where in theory had total control, in truth, many of them where bond by many different groups and rules, and merely depended on individuals personality.

Thing with Royal lines, is like with any Dictatorship, book stops with last man and so all mistakes get unfairly blamed on one person!

PS Also not one of us live in a Democracy, in Britain, you live in an Elected Dictatorship

and most other countries, it will be 3 parted system of separated powers, equally set between 3 groups to each balance one another out, equaling Federal State System

If we lived in true Democracy, then everything we did would have vote and it wouldn't be a first pass post vote ether, it would be a balance vote, where everyones vote has equal weight and that much of it, gets that way,

so if had 10 poeple

5=Vote A
3=Vote B
2=Vote C

then there would 5A, 3B and 2C

Sadly this system of prefect balance could never work, which why ended up with pretty same as what had before, only now, we can kick them out, if annoy us enough and all the members are lot more known rather than one shown as one head of state

Of course, this for Western countries, not even got time to go into others lol

[Apple]

LoL henry the third would have been a good choice

[Spoofs3]

Spoofs 2000 innocence English settlers, who had done nothing more than be born to english names were murdered in that as well, and it wasn't genocide. Genocide is where kill everyone in area, to exterminate them and it will happen without fight or cause. What happened their was act of suppression, where 5000 Irish, joined with around 3000 French poeple and started mass murderering English poeple, in rebellion and in return, England sent in its Army, who pretty much crushed the rebellion, down to last man. I know England made lot of bad moves in Ireland to say lest, but there was another side in that story whole story.

Ok, Just listen, I can understand SOME areas of your ludicrous ideas in other areas where there CAN be a debate, BUT FUCK OFF, Come on now, Do not even dare say that because we were invaded by the french aswell and we only made allies with the french to fight our own troops
If you had ANY knowledge, The Normans were brought into Ireland to fight other Irish people, hell we were 4 separate nations before, We were freaking small villages of dunno.... 25 people a village?
So HOW THE FUCK can 5000 Irish people go over to england to massacure and kill when we were SMALL VILLAGES,
Some things like that DID happen, but were usually small bands of Irish people who joined with the Vikings after invasion,

And English settlers?
HELL NO! Ulster was IRISH SOIL, Claimed by IRISH PEOPLE, (History proves this, And Relics do fucking aswell)
They killed and conquered to get the land in the first place (And yes, They did, Get your facts straight, The reason WHY the English came in the first place is because the Pope gave permission to the King to "Civilise" The people of ireland, We did NOTHING to them, They did NOTHING to us.. Until then)
Later more plantations occured, OUR rebellions were against THEIR brutality, And Fared, TO be honoust, That is EXTREMILY offensive to Irish people seeing as we barely had any technology. Get facts straight,
Ulster people were attacked for the soil because the remainder of the Druidist faith did not accept the pope and the King.
French didn't come here to fight English until we were attacked first.
They DID exterminate us without a fight or cause.

UGH, You make me angry >:V

[Orga777]

....And yet people call foul about the Americans taking land from Native Americans... I guess we learned well from the British... :thatface:

Yeah, just being facetious now... But still, I wonder why the rest of the world isn't held to the same standards as much as the US is... :(

[HeartRyou]

They DID exterminate us without a fight or cause.

UGH, You make me angry >:V

Good for you spoofs. The Ukraine was treated unfairly throughout history as well. It's amazing how stronger nations are able to manipulate the history of other lands and write off tragedies as insignificant.

[Fat1Fared]

Ok, Just listen, I can understand SOME areas of your ludicrous ideas in other areas where there CAN be a debate, BUT FUCK OFF, Come on now, Do not even dare say that because we were invaded by the french aswell and we only made allies with the french to fight our own troops
If you had ANY knowledge, The Normans were brought into Ireland to fight other Irish people, hell we were 4 separate nations before, We were freaking small villages of dunno.... 25 people a village?
So HOW THE FUCK can 5000 Irish people go over to england to massacure and kill when we were SMALL VILLAGES,
Some things like that DID happen, but were usually small bands of Irish people who joined with the Vikings after invasion,

And English settlers?
HELL NO! Ulster was IRISH SOIL, Claimed by IRISH PEOPLE, (History proves this, And Relics do fucking aswell)
They killed and conquered to get the land in the first place (And yes, They did, Get your facts straight, The reason WHY the English came in the first place is because the Pope gave permission to the King to "Civilise" The people of ireland, We did NOTHING to them, They did NOTHING to us.. Until then)
Later more plantations occured, OUR rebellions were against THEIR brutality, And Fared, TO be honoust, That is EXTREMILY offensive to Irish people seeing as we barely had any technology. Get facts straight,
Ulster people were attacked for the soil because the remainder of the Druidist faith did not accept the pope and the King.
French didn't come here to fight English until we were attacked first.
They DID exterminate us without a fight or cause.

UGH, You make me angry >:V

Spoofs, you misread what I put and I want you to know, I wasn't justifying the english reaction to 17th century rebellion, in anyway, and if it seemed I was, I am sorry, I know it was wrong and every English person feels shame for a lot of their past, for our Empire and for all the other crap we did, we really do feel shame for it.
-I mean there was 30,000 poeple dead by end and only 5000 of them were English, so don't think I don't know why the Irish hate us, hell I expect we would feel same way. I just didn't like way you said it, as it made it sound like the English just went to Ireland on whim and start killing poeple for fun, when the truth is, there was a rebellion (in which 2000 innocence english settlers were killed) and it was put down, and I know it was put down in the most harsh way possible and that we can easily say that English should never have entered Ireland or any of the other countries we did, however we did do it and now need to live with that shame, probably to end of time!!!!!!

but this is highly charged area, and I will not continue it, as sort of thing, which can go to far, all I will say is read some non-Irish sources (not saying english sources, as then get same problem other way round, just non-Irish) and I know the English where worse and can take blame as original cause, but niether side was as clean as like to make out

And just to show, don't want to continue, I will delate what I put, if you wish and like I said, I am sorry, if it sounded like I was justifying the reaction of english, I wasn't.

[Spoofs3]

Spoofs, you misread what I put and I want you to know, I wasn't justifying the english reaction to 17th century rebellion, in anyway, and if it seemed I was, I am sorry, I know it was wrong and every English person feels shame for a lot of their past, for our Empire and for all the other crap we did, we really do feel shame for it.
-I mean there was 30,000 poeple dead by end and only 5000 of them were English, so don't think I don't know why the Irish hate us, hell I expect we would feel same way. I just didn't like way you said it, as it made it sound like the English just went to Ireland on whim and start killing poeple for fun, when the truth is, there was a rebellion (in which 2000 innocence english settlers were killed) and it was put down, and I know it was put down in the most harsh way possible and that we can easily say that English should never have entered Ireland or any of the other countries we did, however we did do it and now need to live with that shame, probably to end of time!!!!!!

but this is highly charged area, and I will not continue it, as sort of thing, which can go to far, all I will say is read some non-Irish sources (not saying english sources, as then get same problem other way round, just non-Irish) and I know the English where worse and can take blame as original cause, but niether side was as clean as like to make out

And just to show, don't want to continue, I will delate what I put, if you wish and like I said, I am sorry, if it sounded like I was justifying the reaction of english, I wasn't.

No, I know the irish weren't clean, But that rant was against one sentence you DID say and I know you said it, that the Irish went and killed just because they had English names, Which makes it seem like you said the English didn't do anything to us besides live there which was incorrect,
And of course there were to be some English casualties in the Rebellions, We had little say in what happened for ages, And as soon as we WERE given an area to decide what goes on in the country, It was taken away because of another Rebellion by a minority,
And the English didn't come here to kill people for fun, i didn't even say it that way, I said the Pope gave permission for the king to "Civilise" us, Meaning the King wanted land, The pope gave permission.

TO be honoust, The Irish hate the English so much because not of the Killings (Cromwell Massacure, Plantations)
but for the taxations (Subjected to all countries, So no bother there)
Destruction of national culture (Speaking irish, banned, irish dance and clothes, banned)
Destruction of a working government (Celtic Era had happy people, A working system of a mixture of Anarchy and Communism, Everyone helped each other for an equal share, but in small sections, Destroyed for the English system of Females being unequal, One heir system, King of all)

BUT, The main reason most Irish hate the English is because of the more modern ideals, Post 1798
(irish government taken away in 1798 for direct rule, When Home rule was voted in for 1914 (Won the vote) The English refused to give home rule despite the wish of the people, Remained Direct Rule.
Execution of the leaders of 1916 who fought because of the refusal to the Home Rule (including James Connolly who was injured in the battle and died strapped to a chair because he couldn't even stand for his firing squad)

And by the way, The numbers were alot more than 30000 Dead...
I dunno where that number came from because in total there was alotmore, In a single rebellion, Alot less :P

[Fat1Fared]

Ok, now see where coming and that was my mistake of putting in a poor way, however the point I was trying to make is the poeple killed were inncenonece poeple who lived in Ireland (yes there would have been bad ones, among them,) but got the anger of the nation they were living against them, for actions of their leaders, and that is what I meant.

The 30,000 number is total amount believed to have died in 1798 rebellion for both sides, which is one I'm on about!

Spoofs, please read the 1914 history again and like said not from Irish source, as that is another piece of history, where rumor overtook fact. The Liberal Government, actually passed a bill for your independence (Passed, not even thought, they did it,) but then there was a mutantriy among the army that was in Ireland against this bill and they refused to pull out and give Ireland back. The English where about to face Germany in war, and couldn't afford to start fighting its own army, so it actually offered the Irish, a deal in which they would have home rule, but still be under England Name (basically what Scotland has now,) for several years and once Germany was dealt with, then full independence would be given, however though most of Irish were willing to accept this, the main groups involved turned it down, and said the English were trying to back out of their side of bargain, and tried to start a forceful rebellion, however this never got started as most where willing to accept deal, but the English believed it Would and they were about to face another rebellion, and this led to the events which followed as the English, then stupidly tried heavy handed tactic's to suppress a non-existent rebellion and by doing, sparked unsurprisingly anger, which then actually led to people joining rebellious movements <facepalm> and as say the rest is history,


However the English Government gave you home rule, but were forced to take it away as their own troops betrayed them for it.

And I think this is bit which upsets me the most, as the Irish believe we refused their independence in 1914, when we didn't, and so much could have been avoided if we hadn't been facing a war at time (could have dealt with our own troops, easily otherwise. (remember our army only had few hundreds-thousand men,)) or if you had accepted the deal or if we hadn't acted like morons at the very end!!!!!!

[Spoofs3]

Spoofs, please read the 1914 history again and like said not from Irish source, as that is another piece of history, where rumor overtook fact. The Liberal Government, actually passed a bill for your independence (Passed, not even thought, they did it,) but then there was a mutantriy among the army that was in Ireland against this bill and they refused to pull out and give Ireland back. The English where about to face Germany in war, and couldn't afford to start fighting its own army, so it actually offered the Irish, a deal in which they would have home rule, but still be under England Name (basically what Scotland has now,) for several years and once Germany was dealt with, then full independence would be given, however though most of Irish were willing to accept this, the main groups involved turned it down, and said the English were trying to back out of their side of bargain, and tried to start a forceful rebellion, however this never got started as most where willing to accept deal, but the English believed it Would and they were about to face another rebellion, and this led to the events which followed as the English, then stupidly tried heavy handed tactic's to suppress a non-existent rebellion and by doing, sparked unsurprisingly anger, which then actually led to people joining rebellious movements <facepalm> and as say the rest is history,

However the English Government gave you home rule, but were forced to take it away as their own troops betrayed them for it.

And I think this is bit which upsets me the most, as the Irish believe we refused their independence in 1914, when we didn't, and so much could have been avoided if we hadn't been facing a war at time (could have dealt with our own troops, easily otherwise. (remember our army only had few hundreds-thousand men,)) or if you had accepted the deal or if we hadn't acted like morons at the very end!!!!!!

ACTUALLY now, you got some reasons, right, The main reason was the War with Germany and they needed Ireland to stay within their power. And no, They NEVER gave homerule, This is not a mistake because as soon as the bill was passed, World War I broke out, They couldn't afford to give homerule.
And the Army mutiny?
non existant...
The Army within Ireland was British, Mostly British.
The Irish really weren't part of the army.
I believe what you MEAN is the protests against home Rule.
Which were organized by... Unionists...
And the Irish were not offered up in World War I and Conscription which was forced on all Britisha reas was not on ireland... Due to...
Unionists,
Unionists hated Home Rule, And defied it with a passion. We had no mutiny at any time until 1916 :P

(Ok, This is becoming useless, so NEW THREAD)


Also, Yeah, Kigns are not that great, From all the history, They were gotten rid of, And amazingly, That does not say much about them :P