Monarchies weren't such a bad idea after all...

Someone sometime in history decided that it was a great idea for the common man and woman to have a voice as to how government was run. All good ideas work in theory, but most are terrible when put into practice. This was one of them.

See the "will of the people" is fickle. "The people" have too many opinions, different circumstances, different levels of education and knowledge about any and everything and selfish motivations. Thus if government is to follow the will of the people, it is doomed to be inefficient.

I know what you're thinking--its really what the MAJORITY of the people want. But the will of the majority changes from one day to the next. One day a president is popular, the next they aren't. One day we have to band together, ignoring differences of race, creed, religion, socio-economic status, etc. and eliminate any and all anti-American sentiment on the planet--the next we're back to hating each other in addition to those that would have our demise. The majority is only as smart as the individuals that make up the majority--and unfortunately a majority of Americans would be classified as (excuse the political incorrectness) "stupid."

Which is why I'd like to see the return of monarchies. And not constitutional monarchy like in England. I'm talking good old fashioned what-the-king/queen-says-goes even if it means he/she possibly becomes a tyrant.

Thanks to the Internet everyone and their mother (literally) has a place to complain about their lives, circumstances, and best of all their government. Freedom of speech is great--except when it's not. Allowing everyone the ability to spout of their feelings is a terrible idea since most people have no idea what they're talking about. (See above--well over half of America is "stupid" remember?) So let me school you:

America is in its current condition because there are too many people involved in the process. Too many chefs in the kitchen. Too many chiefs, not enough indians. It's not Obama's fault. It's not Congress' fault. It's not the House's fault. Fault lies with the Founding Fathers. Yeah I said it. The former slave owners and liberals tried to make sure each state had rights came to its best compromise. Unfortunately that model worked fine with 13 states; it's a terrible idea for 50. 100 senators and over 400 Representatives later we have the current mess. We're not even going to talk about the various tiers of government--state, local and municipal layers that make things worse. Add the fact that the Constitution is written to purposely make it difficult to make changes and you have everything we like to complain about now.

That still doesn't address the love to hate whomever sits in the Oval Office. Our government is designed so that power is spread out so that we DON'T end up with a monarchy. Because heaven forbid any one person be able to do what he/she wants. But again this logic is flawed.

The difference between monarchs and presidents is that kings want one thing above all that presidents don't give a damn about: love. See presidents are beholden to voters--they will do whatever their advisors think voters want done. Monarchs like being monarchs over anything else, thus any decision is made with that in mind--making sure that they get to stay a monarch. And nothing ensures longevity than making sure the people are happy. Because enough unhappy people lead coups.

I realize the downside of a monarchy. Choosing a monarch and the economics of monarchy sort of throws a monkey wrench in my logic. But we've given democracy a shot over the past almost 300 years--and it continues to fail. Instead we've given currency the power. Whether it be political or actual capital, whoever has the most gets to run things. Large donors wield more influence than middle class and lower class voters. Laws get passed based on vote trading among law makers. Whoever HAS the most, gets the most benefit. That is not democracy. If my voice isn't going to matter, at least my government should be efficient. Give me a monarch.

No empire the size of the United States (and it is an empire) has ever been a democracy. The Roman empire began to fall after it became a democracy--and then Caesar took over. That allowed Rome to live a little while longer but it began to break up (again) when democracy returned. The U.S. will fall too eventually. While I appreciate the plurality that is our great country, what will save it is unification. That can't happen with 3-4 levels of government and several thousand elected officials and hundreds of millions of people with differing opinions. Everyone needs shut up and get on board with the same idea/plan or be deemed a traitor.

Your Highness in waiting,

SHO-NUFF

The meanest, prettiest, and baddest mo-fo low-down around this town