Amazon.com Widgets

Monarchism in America: Would a constitutional monarch be effective in ending the constant bi-partisan deadlock?

  • A monarch would be a better replacement for the current administration.

    I believe that a benevolent monarch with the support of the people will be able to make more decisive decisions in our government without being tied to the opinions of our two political parties. While this is in violation of the current constitution, a monarch with the support of the populace will be able to make stable decisions regarding foreign and domestic affairs.

  • Monarchism is great

    I believe in a sort of diarchic fascism - Il Duce will control the government, and will be chosen by his merit - but the Monarch will control the culture of the realm.

    In other words, the Monarch is the head of the culture that Il Duce protects and governs.

  • That's one of the main reasons George Washington didn't accept the presidency for a 3rd term.

    The most important goal of the constitution was to prevent anyone from obtaining unfair power over the people. That's why our government not only has so many built-in checks and balances, but includes things like the 2nd amendment, to prevent a person from having too much control over the people. Having a monarch would destroy that, excluding the fact that a large percentage of the population in the U.S. would die before they would see a king put into power.
    There is a very famous quote from Thomas Jefferson:
    "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny..."
    The idea behind the quote and the constitution, is that the power should remain with the people. That is not possible with a monarchy.

  • No, it wouldn't

    You have huge cultural disparities in the US, thy best way would not to consolidate power but to diffuse it. Surprisingly people want control over their immediate environment more so than every soul in the country, so if the individual states had more power than the currently do in relation to the federal government, then you'd had parallel systems able to exist with less of them stepping over each other, which is the entire basis of the conflict.

    I don't see how that is resolved with a "monarchy" without going into a a strict dictatorship.

  • Would it end it? Sure would. Along with everything else

    America is not a constitutuional monarchy. It would do way more harm than good to force a monarch into office. Everything would have to be 're written including our constitution, good luck because I'd be one of millions you would have to kill. The way we fix this deadlock is the people finally unite and do something about it. We have deadlock because this country is designed to have the people run it. When they don't you have our quasi socialist government. So the effective in the motion is misleading


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.