Trying To Change Perception One Post At A Time

This is false.

Monarchism is a system of governance, nothing less and nothing more, just as it is not an inherently authoritarian or archaic institution, it is not an inherently moral one, and while ill admit to being guilty at looking at some past Monarchs with rose-tinted glasses I am not a conservative, I belive that the right to govern comes only from the consent masses, making democratic elements important in any governmental system that wants to be considered just.

Ultimately I support the notion of Monarchical governance for purely practical reasons, I belive it is the duty of a leader to govern with the best interests of the country and its people at heart, to give them the freedom and support structures to ensure they and their communities can flourish, to monitor for and punish abuses of power from those with the money or I fluence to do so, and I belive it is much easier to garner this kind of leadership in people who do not seek out power, and who are prepared for it from a young age.

I do not doubt that republics are capable of the good governance which I have described here, but I've seen far too often how the mechanism of elections can be twisted and abused by people with money and the belief that they should get to dictate the lives of others, that is to say, exactly the people who should not have power.

To all this end I belive democracy is best manifested not through the election of representatives or executives, but through direct democracy, through wich the people can consent to laws written by capable experts, and call for the removal of leaders who fail in their duty.

One arrangement I've come to increasingly like is a sort of 3 part system between a Monarch-lead executive, a meritocratic and expert focused assembly of law-makers, and direct democracy to ensure that the people of a nation are consulted and consenting.

The basic idea is that a monarch, who should always be listening for and keeping an eye out for the issues and forces wich plague or disadvantage their people, sets an issue before a law-makers assembly, asking for them to find an actionable solution to a given problem.

This assembly should be made of experts councils, who will gather relevant disciplinces (economists for economic issues, environmental scientists for environmental issues, ETC) and with the guidance of someone who's attended a law school and is practiced in the writing of legislation, will discuss the means and measures that will adress the issue, and then turn that into a bill.

This bill should have both its full length, and a overview that addresses the basic plan process and coats, before being put to the citizenry, likely with the use of digital infrastructure, to be voted on, if it passes it returns to the Monarch and their departments to execute the law and see to its enforcement, if it is rejected then the issue must return to the assembly.