-
Let's see; critics of the war continued to hold their seats in the Reichstag in the German Empire. Critics of the war in Wilson's America were imprisoned, including Eugene Debs himself, Wilson's primary political opponent. Which sounds more like something you'd read about in, say, Liberia or Zimbabwe?
-
By the same virtue, you might as well ask why Italy and Iraq aren't governed by the descendants of Tiberius and Gilgamesh. To say bureaucracies represent an unvested interested is decidedly untrue; there's nothing "unvested" about big government salaries, bonuses and benefits, and I can tell you from personal experience that New Zealand
-
To what practical extent can the Queen actually exercise power over these areas, though? The Governor-General, her representative, is a nonentity in New Zealand, whose only real non-ceremonial purpose is to rubber-stamp Parliament. Some lands may be "Crown" lands, but in practice they are administered by self-serving, faceless bureaucracies
-
I believe that Elizabeth II and Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud are respectively estimated at 450,000,000 and 18,000,000,000 USD. This might not account for land ownership, and you're definitely right in thinking about the net worth of individuals who have effective control over areas of government, but I doubt that's the case for the Queen
-
Actually, the point I was making by citing these areas was that unrestricted immigration under social democratic regimes leads to civil disorder, demographic breakup and massive surges in crime. You yourself acknowledged the negative nature of Muslim immigration into Europe. This is more a problem with multiculturalism than with social democracy per
-
How, exactly, is the EU an Austrian and Habsburgian conspiracy when it is lead by democratic egalitarians, who are the opposite of laissez faire capitalists and monarchists? Furthermore, why would the Rothschild and Warburg families wish to fund an intellectual movement which is opposed to fractional reserve banking, which is exactly how they obtained
-
"Democracies have open borders which reduce uncertainty and increase familiarity between subject nations and peoples." Tell that to the Californians with their Mexicans, the British with their Pakistanis, the French with their Algerians and Romani, the Germans with their Turks, the Italians with their Albanians, the Spanish with their Moroccans
-
That isn't my argument; I am referring to government spending as a percentage of GDP, not government spending in absolute terms. When I refer to "mind warping", I refer to the fact that most citizens of most monarchies considered their king to be a seperate and oftentimes hostile figure to their own interests. There was no delusion under
-
Democracies more respectful of civil and economic liberties? Don't make me laugh. Under medieval monarchy, government spending as percentage of GDP hovered between 5-8%. Most modern democracies hover between 40 and 50%, the US included. Until King James came along, you didn't have smoking bans. There were no "diversity seminars", multiculturalism
-
Ah, good; for a minute there I'd thought I'd pulled the Internet equivalent of lightning hitting a clock tower attached to a DeLorean.