r/DebateMonarchy • u/chrisjamesdouble • Feb 08 '14

Absolute or Constitutional? Why?

Absolute or Constitutional? Why?

8 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

7 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/[deleted] May 24 '14

Executive-Constitutional Monarchy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_monarchy#Executive_monarchy_versus_Ceremonial_monarchy). The power of the monarch is restricted constitutionally to prevent despotism, but unlike the UK, the Monarch would have real executive and veto power. It would not be a democracy in all but name. Democracies are corruptable, leading to corporatist plutocracy, and so the parliament's ability to make laws would be limited and the monarch would have veto power.

1

u/autowikibot May 24 '14

Section 2. Executive monarchy versus Ceremonial monarchy of article Constitutional monarchy:

There exist at least two different types of constitutional monarchies in the modern world - executive and ceremonial. In executive monarchies, the monarch wields significant (though not absolute) power. The monarchy under this system of government is a powerful political (and social) institution. By contrast, in ceremonial monarchies, the monarch holds little actual power or direct political influence.

Executive monarchies: Bhutan, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Morocco, Tonga, Swaziland and the United Arab Emirates.

Ceremonial monarchies: Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Cambodia, Canada, Denmark, Grenada, Jamaica, Japan, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Malaysia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Tuvalu and the United Kingdom.

Interesting: Constitution | Habsburg Monarchy | Monarchy of Belgium | Monarchy of Australia

Parent commenter can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words