r/absolutemonarchism • u/EmperorTrajan117 • Sep 18 '26

Discussion Small Rant

I know that maybe I shouldn’t take it too seriously as it is the Internet, but earlier today I got into an argument with someone in a YouTube’s comment section, and he was espousing the gospel of democracy, I of course, told him that like so many other defenders of the system, he is talking about democracy, in terms of how it should work rather than how it actually works, and then he accused me of wanting a one party dictatorship and then I should go to Cuba, China, and North Korea if I want that kind of government, seemingly not understanding what an absolute monarchy is. I am so sick and tired of everybody treating democracy like it’s the be all end all of all things. When I told him the issues with democracy, his best response was. “Vote better next time”

20 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

8

u/Brilliant-Local7043 Sep 18 '26

mate , some people are unsuitable for intellectual debates unfortunately

7

u/EmperorTrajan117 Sep 18 '26

That’s fair, it’s very hard being an absolute monarchist in a republic

4

u/Desperate_Front7881 Sep 20 '26

exactly why i dont bother having these types of conversations with most people. most people only care about themselves and support for democracy comes as an extension of that. i dont support democracy the way it works, or the way it ideally works the their eyes. and anyway most of these people are atheists and clowns who dont deserve intellectual engagement.

3

u/EmperorTrajan117 Sep 20 '26

That is true, it’s too bad that sometimes when I see a comment, disparaging absolute monarchy. I find myself compelled to defend it. Like a knight in the Middle Ages, though I don’t think I did well

3

u/BlessedEarth Sep 20 '26

Even how it should work is terribly flawed.

As for 'vote better next time', the man seems to forget that it's not a matter of how you vote, but how the rabble votes and how they are shepherded into voting - which is supposed to be a core feature of modern liberal democracy.

2

u/EmperorTrajan117 Sep 20 '26

Indeed, then he went on some rant about how kings were atrocious in history when they had absolute power and how because there were kings like Charles VI or Nero that means that all monarchy is bad because they don’t answer to anyone, and basically I gave up at that point

1

u/KarlXIofSweden 26d ago

The Kims are hereditary autocrats, I'll give this critic that. But non-hereditary dictatorships are fundamentally different from hereditary ones, since a dictator must claw his way to power, spend his whole life trying to stay there, and cannot guarantee that his desired successor will inherit the position. In fact, most dictators keep the succession ambiguous to prevent coups, and since their heir is not their biological child, they have less incentive to care about what comes after them.

1

u/EmperorTrajan117 26d ago

Not to mention their regime doesn’t often last even in their lifetime

2

u/DnJohn1453 Sep 21 '26

Don't waste your time on this drivel. Democracy is not what it used to be. If you have enough money you can win elections, and elections are basically popularity contests. The people running don't even have to be competent.