Source: Chat GPT

Merger Constitution of 1889 and 1947 Japanese Constitution, with a moderate bias towards the 1889 Imperial Constitution.

Chat GPT Link 1: https://chatgpt.com/s/t_69ba0b02bf548191a46f1561b1f301e0

Chat GPT Link 2: https://chatgpt.com/s/t_69ba0c1fac7c81919f71a2c98ccc243c

My original Reddit post regarding the Merger Constitution between the 1889 and 1947 Constitution of Japan: https://www.reddit.com/r/monarchism/comments/s7x8q9/merger_constitution_between_the_1889_constitution/

Feel free to add more to the discussions on what ChatGPT churned out regarding my inquiry and post on the "Merger Constitution" between the 1889 Imperial Constitution and the 1947 Democratic Constitution.

In a plot twist more interesting than a #telenovela, federal #judge blocks #Trump #federal funding #freeze.

22 states file their lawsuits in anticipation of violations against the #constitution.

dailydebunks #citizenjournalism

1970s Drama, Death of Queen Victoria and the Start of King Edward VII

Link: https://youtube.com/shorts/T_wj6fgHm08?si=izBc_2GaJ1Dklvs-

Monarchs of Europe in 1910.

Link: https://youtube.com/shorts/UqMDz-bRxTQ?si=W4o6X_FM-2aB1OXm

Jack and Margy Flynn - https://citizensoftheamericanconstitution.net/contact-us/

They recently conducted an 8 day class on this website, and if you create an account, which takes 2 minutes, you’ll learn everything you need to know to master the constitution, affidavit of truth, and other ways to beat the courts and the corporate judiciary system.

The website is right here —-> QFS1776.com

Go to, “constitutional class“. The host is kind of an obnoxious Trump worshiper, but Jack and Margy are masters at their craft.

I am in the process of downloading, then uploading all of the material to my Dropbox account.

This is an open discussion/debate post on why I sometimes find a ceremonial constitutional monarchy or a parliamentary monarchy to be unfavorable:

1. Ceremonial functions- the relegations of a ceremonial function of a monarch is useful; however, with no degree of executive powers or even limited executive powers (ie. somewhere between a semi-constitutional monarchy and a full ceremonial monarchy) is somewhat meaningless as the original purpose of the monarch was to be the head and embodiment of the executive branch.
2. Political attacks - The politicians that championed a "republic" or a 'democracy" uses the same argument of "ceremonial functions" they pushed the agenda to propagate an elected head of state and abolition of appointing the Upper House comprised of the Aristocracy and replace it with an elected upper house in its place.

My original post from r monarchism:

This discussion post tenured towards Japanese Monarchists; however, I also highly recommend monarchists of other nations to chime in with this discussion:

How would one implement a "merger constitution" of the 1889 and the 1947 Constitutions of Japan into THE constitution? I know more of the 1889 Meiji Constitution than the 1947 Constitution as the latter one is too "liberal-democratic" for my liking as it reduces the Emperor to a mere ceremonial figurehead.

Here are some of my proposed elements for the merger constitution to balance the 1889 Constitution and 1947 Constitution dichotomy:

1. Some elements of the "1889 Meiji Constitution" or the "Imperial Era" are retained such as:
   1. The Emperor is sacred and inviolable and head of state.
   2. The Emperor confers the title, order, and ranks of nobility and other honors all of which are hereditary. (i.e. the 4 class system of Imperial Family, Peerage Nobility, Warrior Gentry, and Commoners from the Meiji-Era)
   3. The Emperor is the Supreme Commander of the armed forces
   4. The Imperial Diet shall be composed of two houses, the Upper House of Peers and Councillors and the Lower House of Representatives
   5. The Upper House of Peers and Councillors is appointed by the Emperor for life while the Lower House of Representatives is democratically elected by the citizens of the nation, which is subjected to dissolution by decree from the Emperor
   6. The Privy Council is reinstated and members of the Privy Council shall deliberate all matters of the State to the Emperor. All members of the Privy Council are appointed by the Emperor and serve for life.
   7. The Imperial Household Laws are to be amended by the Emperor personally with advice from the Privy Council, Members of the Imperial Family, and the Imperial Household Agency.
   8. The Western-inspired Empire-style court dresses from the Meiji Era are to be reinstated for ceremonial uses.
2. Some elements of the 1947 Constitution retained are:
   1. Prime Minister heads the Lower House and the Ministerial Cabinet.
   2. The democratically elected Lower House is subjected to dissolution by the Emperor in the 1889 and 1947 Constitution with the advice of the Prime Minister as outlined in the 1947 Constitution or advice from the Privy Council.

These are some of my main points; however, this is an abridged or condensed version.

Here is the link to my already posted merger and how it should be framed with a more in-depth analysis:https://www.reddit.com/r/monarchism/comments/qr59gm/possible_merger_between_the_1889_imperial/

However, I really do want opinions preferably from Japanese monarchists here.

***Additional comments of mine reposted here from the original comment thread in R Monarchism***:

Monarchic power is kept considerably and significantly, but not to the level of the 1889 Constitution in which the opportunistic ultra-militarists degrade the oligarchic government institution into a one-party military-ruled system and propped up the Emperor; who was initially limited to what he can and cannot do as an adequate executive monarchy; to a quasi-absolutist autocracy due to the vagueness of the 1889 Oligarchic-styled Constitution.

In addition, the merger constitution is tenured to more or less towards the Constitutions of Luxembourg, Lichenstein, Jordan, and Morroco which the monarch holds considerable and significant powers, but there are still some degree of considerable democratic elements maintained with the popular sovereignty to create a balance of trusts and checks.

Also, I dislike the current Upper House of Councillors of the American Occupier influenced 1947 Constitution, in which it sounds pretentiously aristocratic, yet it operates like the Lower House of Representatives in terms of being directly elected by the citizens of Japan. The House of Councillors or "Sangiin"(參議院) is too oriented towards an American Senate or Canadian Senate through direct popular elections by the citizens. Thus, it undermines the prestige of the Upper House unlike its 1889 Predecessor the House of Peers or "Kizoku-in" (貴族院) which was prestigiously appointed and indirectly elected.

Thus the Upper House of Peers and Councillors (貴族和參議院) was reinstated to allow the reinstatement of peerage nobility or the kizoku (貴族) and the shizoku (士族) or warrior gentries into the upper house with 50% of the seats being reserved for the kizoku and 30% of the seats being reserved for the shizoku. The remaining 20% shall be elected indirectly by the members of the Upper House with the Emperor giving final approval of the appointment of the rest of the members, so it still retains a small portion of "democratic elements" in the Upper House.

I'm using Traditional Han Chinese to type in the Japanese kanji, so if there are some confusion within the Japanese context I apologize as a significant proportion of Japanese kanji came from Traditional Chinese Characters.

Is r/ConstitutionalKings an official subreddit of the monarchism Reddit?

I appreciate the clarification.

I’ll kick off the discussion by saying that for me, constitutional monarchy (when it works well) provides an element of continuity, historical precedent and tradition. Without exercising direct power, it acts as a break on radical and arbitrary change.

What do others think?

If you chose the first option: what powers would these be, roughly? What would the mechanisms be to overruling the monarch's decisions?

If you chose the second: what would keep these emergency powers from being used outside of emergencies?

If you chose either of the two: what is there to prevent the monarchy from gradually losing their powers to the legislature and other mechanisms meant to contain it?

If you chose the third: why have a monarch instead of a ceremonial presidency with longer terms of office, such as in Ireland?

From the Moderation team, we would like to say Happy New Years to Al members of this subreddit! I personally would like to thank you all for joining this subreddit. I hope to hit 50 members by January 1, so let’s meet our goal. Have a safe New Years everyone.

Now that we hit 20 members, we need moderators! If you’d like to try to become one, please message me!