Who's who among PM monarchists

[Sojourner]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jan 19 2006, 01:21 PM']Yeah but you must admit that inbreeding was a major downer
[right][snapback]860974[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I know some people in the state to my south that don't think so.

[Pig of Intrigue]

[quote name='Sojourner' date='Jan 19 2006, 12:22 PM']I know some people in the state to my south that don't think so.
[right][snapback]860976[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


You sound a little bitter about that. Something tells me you've heard the line " You don't kiss near as well as my cousin" before.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Pig of Intrigue' date='Jan 19 2006, 01:26 PM']You sound a little bitter about that.  Something tells me you've heard the line " You don't kiss near as well as my cousin" before.
[right][snapback]860977[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I don't know what you're talking about.

[Aloysius]

yeah... inbreeding is bad...

[Myles Domini]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Jan 19 2006, 05:13 PM']Well Aloy, you have a point, but I keep my ground.

1. to alude that disagreeing with the hereditary system is akin to attacking the family is a fallacy, please try to stay above these things.  It was not my intent whatsoever to attck the family institution.

Also, it does not mean that a son cannot be king after his father either!  If the son is worthiest amongst his peers, then so be it; but let not the singular argument of family determine the root of power - please!  So many arguments can go aginst that!  Do you really want me to inumerate them?  (quick check if we are on the debate board; carp, no we're not... but open mic is good enough)
"Blood is thicker than water is a lie invented by undeserving kins." Shakespeare (I hear some of you around here are a fan of this guy...)
[right][snapback]860969[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I really do like the sound of this argument but I find few examples of elected monarchy that succeeded. Indeed, it was because the Holy Roman Empire was an elected monarchy that it ended up being nothing more than a ramshakle collection of independent entities and never managed to attain the centralisation needed to emerge into a nation-state. Charles V aka Carlos I and his predecessors ended up shelling out millions in contemporary currency to get the electors to vote them in. If you ask me its just another avenue for bribery and vice to flourish in. The richest would soon find a way to 'prove' the incompetancy of the heir elect and buy their way to power. The best way to produce a competant King is to raise him from birth to be such.

[Didacus]

bickering and squabbles for the next to rule can be averted in numerous peaceful ways.

How much bickering was there during the conclave that elected BXVI? Long may he live?

A ruler would choose a sucessor by any number of means in ways far more fitting than "he's my son, I think he's a moron, but he'll bare the crown someday nonetheless". A concalve would be fun, using a certain method to select memebers that can take part... Have an IQ test determine who is most fitting? Life achievements mean anything? A prince who knows he'll eventually bare the crown no matter what won't have much incentive now will he? the benefits are inumerable as soon as you start moving away from the romanticism of 'my son, the next ruler; maybe I should have named him Bob instead of Herod".

Aloy! Why, if I was king I'd have your thought process outlawed right now! SFD!!!