Skip to main content

View Diary: Current TV sold to Feudal Lord. Al Gore sells out. Anger??? (136 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Really? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TFinSF, PhilJD, Zack from the SFV

    As an American, I find the idea that someone is worthy of deference soled based upon their lienge abhorent.

    •  That's not exactly what monarchy necessarily means (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jabney, kyril, Sharoney, trumpeter

      though. For example, when Norway gained its independence from Denmark they elected a king for themselves and that line became hereditary. In many cases, the origins of a kingdom reflect someone who was able to gain support from a majority of people, sometimes just nobles but sometimes including burgers. The German monarchies were explicitly dependent upon popular concurrence. In addition, ruling like any other complicated social skill, entails a lot of intellectual and social capitol. Though people can pick that up on the fly, having the heir of the monarch next in line has a measure of logic to it (not always supported in the actual case, of course).

      Going further back, a king was someone who could bring together antagonistic tribes by making them kin, with the king as symbolic father.  A kingdom is in fact a kin-dom.



      Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? . . . and respect the dignity of every human being.

      by Wee Mama on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 10:07:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  In the countries Wee Mama stated (0+ / 0-)

      and also my own, Belgium, monarchy is nothing but a symbolic representation of our past and how our country came into existence. Royal families literally have no political power (let alone over elected officials) and are not interested in achieving it. Deference is optional and believe you me, cracking jokes about the "royal family"and feeling that monarchy is an archaic institution is much, MUCH more common than adoration (except maybe in Britain or The Netherlands). As far as democracies go, I'd take my figurehead king with our 7 to 12 Party-system and our rule that only a coalition of winning parties can be a government over the Two-Party-System in the US any day.

      We are Constitutional monarchies and tradition has kept royals in a symbolic place to the delight of a tiny slice of the general population, to the irritation of a slightly bigger slice and to the very definition of apathy for the majority of the public. Having royals doesn't mean that we can't be advanced when it comes to other things regarding governing, justice, equality, the social contract between citizen and state, the continuous drive to improve the quality of life for everyone, etc. That's what Wee Mama was getting at, at least that's how I read it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site