zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. lostlo+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-09-08 18:24:15
It’s almost as though there could be a better system, one where ability could be judged and debated and voted on.
replies(2): >>charle+A7 >>grumpl+a92
◧
2. charle+A7[view] [source] 2022-09-08 18:49:41
>>lostlo+(OP)
It's already the case though.
replies(1): >>xdenni+Yr
◧◩
3. xdenni+Yr[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-09-08 20:16:22
>>charle+A7
The queen of Britain is not elected.

Many monarchies have been elective[1], and in some, the monarch is often picked from the same family. Even that is a better system than "first-born child".

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_monarchy

replies(1): >>jonono+Bl1
◧◩◪
4. jonono+Bl1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-09-09 03:22:15
>>xdenni+Yr
He means that Great Britain already elects their government -- they are a democracy.
replies(1): >>switch+Oy1
◧◩◪◨
5. switch+Oy1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-09-09 05:50:14
>>jonono+Bl1
We didn’t elect this government!
◧
6. grumpl+a92[view] [source] 2022-09-09 11:45:31
>>lostlo+(OP)
Democracies are equally as likely, if not more, to put horrendously unqualified and highly dislikable people into power. And I'm not just talking about the most recent president emeritus. Political debates in the US rarely have anything to do with reason, and popularity is both fickle and a poor measure of what is best for the nation.

At least royals receive lifetimes of training for how to be a public figure and head of state.

[go to top]