Isn't an elected monarch an oxymoron? I thought one of the main points about monarchs was it was a hereditary title. Regardless, I'd be interested in reading about this. Sounds interesting.
Quote from: TR8Rshelf on January 14, 2016, 08:40:04 AMIsn't an elected monarch an oxymoron? I thought one of the main points about monarchs was it was a hereditary title. Regardless, I'd be interested in reading about this. Sounds interesting.its not a hard and fast thing; it just so happens that a massive collection of historical monarchs played by that rule. its the precedent, but not a necessary aspect at the core of things.
Quote from: Azumarill on January 14, 2016, 09:00:33 AMQuote from: TR8Rshelf on January 14, 2016, 08:40:04 AMIsn't an elected monarch an oxymoron? I thought one of the main points about monarchs was it was a hereditary title. Regardless, I'd be interested in reading about this. Sounds interesting.its not a hard and fast thing; it just so happens that a massive collection of historical monarchs played by that rule. its the precedent, but not a necessary aspect at the core of things.What are the 'requirements' for being a monarch, then? I'm curious.
Quote from: TR8Rshelf on January 14, 2016, 09:03:41 AMQuote from: Azumarill on January 14, 2016, 09:00:33 AMQuote from: TR8Rshelf on January 14, 2016, 08:40:04 AMIsn't an elected monarch an oxymoron? I thought one of the main points about monarchs was it was a hereditary title. Regardless, I'd be interested in reading about this. Sounds interesting.its not a hard and fast thing; it just so happens that a massive collection of historical monarchs played by that rule. its the precedent, but not a necessary aspect at the core of things.What are the 'requirements' for being a monarch, then? I'm curious.i guess it would depend on who you ask. id say a government exists under a monarchy when there is a single, sovereign head of state, someone who holds more power than any other agencies or entities within the government and cannot be overridden by them after the monarch has made a decision. how the monarch gets to that position is of little consequence to me.
Quote from: Azumarill on January 14, 2016, 09:08:12 AMQuote from: TR8Rshelf on January 14, 2016, 09:03:41 AMQuote from: Azumarill on January 14, 2016, 09:00:33 AMQuote from: TR8Rshelf on January 14, 2016, 08:40:04 AMIsn't an elected monarch an oxymoron? I thought one of the main points about monarchs was it was a hereditary title. Regardless, I'd be interested in reading about this. Sounds interesting.its not a hard and fast thing; it just so happens that a massive collection of historical monarchs played by that rule. its the precedent, but not a necessary aspect at the core of things.What are the 'requirements' for being a monarch, then? I'm curious.i guess it would depend on who you ask. id say a government exists under a monarchy when there is a single, sovereign head of state, someone who holds more power than any other agencies or entities within the government and cannot be overridden by them after the monarch has made a decision. how the monarch gets to that position is of little consequence to me.What would differentiate that from a dictatorship?
Please no, I don't actually need King Obummer in my life.
Divine or historical right to rule
Your thoughts on electoral monarchy?
