@evan
In the Greek language we distinguish between a constitutional monarchy (where the monarch governs according to a constitution) and βασιλευόμενη δημοκρατία which is a parliamentary democracy with a king (like the UK). Since the 19th century we've had a monarchy, a constitutional monarchy, a democracy with a king, and more recently without a king (aka presidential republic). The two democratic variations have pros and cons but aren't that different really.
@evan Canada is a Constitutional Monarchy in name only, I believe - what constitutional power does the monarch have in Canada?
Also: I would argue that both systems (as parliamentary democracy) are equivalent, and the differences come primarily from the way representatives are elected (PR vs first past the post), the tension between autonomy of states/provinces and the federal government, and the cultural differences between countries.
@evan Wow, what a complicated ploy to get the opportunity to remind us how global you are. You could have just come right out and said “I’m Evan Prodromou, and I’m a jet-setting man of the world.”
I'd say that FPTP voting systems, two-party systems, and money/corruption in politics are bigger issues than the monarchy - but that doesn't mean that you can't fix multiple things at once
@evan I think both are compatible with a liberal democracy. The Three Powers and the checks and balances are the most relevant bit here. I'd add a functioning free press.
@evan I would choose a republic over a constitutional monarchy however imo, what’s more crucial is the system of government. NZ still operates with the crown as head of state but changed its system for electing a government from First Pass the Post (FPP) to Mixed Member Proportional Representation (MMP) after a referendum in 1993.
@evan Niccolò Machiavelli, who really began the writings into the modern republic form of government in Discourses, likely would only exclude a UK style of constitutional monarchy from the definition because the head of state is too weak. It was supposed to be a unification of monarchy + oligarchy + democracy which made a republic stable.
But then again, all political terms have wildly varied definitions in different contexts.
@evan aside from other arguments (and I do like having some type of separation of head of gov.) modern monarchy like Canada or UK is inhumane. The royal family, by no choice of their own, just accident of birth, are essentially zoo animals. Their lives are made extremely weird and perverse even when they want no part of it all. Almost Truman Show-esque. We should probably think of monarchies as human rights violations to the people held as monarchs.
@evan imo a constitutional monarchy is not a democracy by right of having a monarch at all. My dunks on liberal democracy are not really about liberal democracy itself but about its insufficiency on its own
@evan
The most important part is division of power. Starting with never having something like a "majority government". And also heeding the old saying about politicians and diapers.
@evan A laser focus on pragmatic equality (as per Wilson and Pickett’s The Spirit Level). Debating the semantic difference between a 2023 constitutional monarchy and republic is kinda moot.
@evan (Note: I voted for republic as "better", but I know from direct personal experience (Norway) that a constitutional monarchy can work well as a liberal democracy)
@evan IMHO the only way to a liberal democracy is a liberal society. And that needs liberal people. And liberal people come from liberal parents and a liberal school system.
@evan@evan what kind of republic?
(This is my pet peeve about this kind of questions. A constitutional/parlamentarian monarchy can be just as good for a liberal democracy as a cons/parl republic. And I think we all know what some types of republic do to liberal democracies)
@evan
I'm a supporter of reform in Australia to become a parliamentary republic.
Can't say the monarchy affects day-to-day life in Australia, but it stands for a lot of bad things that were done in the Monarch's name. Better we own our own history.
Add comment