• Eheran@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I would assume most monarchies transitioned just as peaceful. What does that prove?

      • Eheran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Sure mate. Hereditary successions were usually smooth. In elective monarchies, there were more power struggles. Do you have anything to add other than insults?

        • blade_barrier@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Not to mention that monarchies last way longer than democracies on average throughout history.

          • Eheran@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Is that so? I would assume democracies last a lot longer than 10 to 50 years? Considering that most of the world has democracies and they tend to be at least since WW2 that does not feel right.

            • blade_barrier@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              53 minutes ago

              Considering I don’t know any democracy that laster longer than 200-300 years and there are a lot of monarchies that lasted for many hundreds or even thousands of years.

              • tree_frog@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                44 minutes ago

                And how are the material conditions for the average working-class person in those monarchies?

                How much autonomy did they have over their lives compared to the 200 or 300 years they would have lived under a democracy?

                How much suffering happened under monarchy compared to democracy?

                Because if all of you are measuring is how long the ruling class can subjugate the working class, then sure I’m monarchy is better.

                It doesn’t mean I want to live under one, but you go ahead.

                • blade_barrier@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  25 minutes ago

                  And how are the material conditions for the average working-class person in those monarchies?

                  Looking at today’s monarchies, the conditions are about the same as in today’s democracies.

                  How much autonomy did they have over their lives compared to the 200 or 300 years they would have lived under a democracy?

                  The same?

                  How much suffering happened under monarchy compared to democracy?

                  The same average amount of suffering.

                  Because if all of you are measuring is how long the ruling class can subjugate the working class, then sure I’m monarchy is better.

                  It’s obviously the most important parameter. If the govt system can’t even sustain itself for long enough, then it’s not even worth considering it.

                  It doesn’t mean I want to live under one

                  Thanks for sharing your opinion.