Is monarchy a better option?

I take this to mean that some people want to actually be under the rule of a king and/or queen. And I take that to mean that some people appreciate their role as nothing but mere subjects. That's fine with me. Just keep that nonsense out of my face, or I'll be quick to call you a fool with no marbles. I could get deeper into this, about the inherent need present in some people to follow rather than lead, as is extremely evident even today, but it's pointless. I will say that I see a lot of people in America whose let-someone-else-do-it mentalities are really more dangerous than most of the things those same people give the "extreme" label to. There's a lot of this going on with the cry for higher taxes and bigger government. It's most certainly not to balance the debt. It's essentially people wanting government to bring fairness, wanting government to be a giant charity. It's people wiping their hands of everything, begging someone else to keep the red flashes out of their periphery, and then grandstanding as if their push for government rule means they actually give a damn what happens in the world. It doesn't wash. I suspect this is the same that some feel when they essentially pawn everything off on a king or queen. "Hey, he'll fix our problems. I can just get on with my business." What do I think about kings and queens? KMA. You are not better than me due to happenstance of birth. I don't care how much money you rob from people or how many folks worship you. There was some movie I was watching a while back, where the guy made the comment that people want to be ruled over -- they want to be subjects. (I think it was The Avengers.) And I think that's about right for some people. At least in the sense that they always want someone else to do the heavy lifting so they can stay self-involved and ignore the world unless it makes an unexpected stop in on them. That obviously isn't the case for everyone, but some people do seem content to leave things in the hands of others willingly.

I live in Canada and our monarch is more of a figure head and not like Louis IV of France who believed he had divine right to rule. In fact, most monarchies are like that. The danger is of someone assuming monarchies are like the Louis Iv type and acts like that rather then one who is just for show and who is considered the symbol of the country. I suspect Obama wants to be the Louis IV type, a despot. and would not be content to be the kind like Queen Eiizabeth of England. And the monarchs gat an extensive training so they will not be tyrants or despots. I like the idea of a republic rather then a democracy since each state or province has differences so what can take for example in Illinois would be different from what takes place in Texas. I would rather be living in a republic or a monarchy like they have for Canadians rather then a despotic monarchy that is a dictatorship. At least here we have freedom.

No, I will never be comfortable under monarchy. Like you said here, the person is a king because of royal birth and it is going to be continued. What if one of the kings turn out to be totally unfit to rule? I would rather have someone who has studied the laws of the country better. People must have a voice on who they want. Elections take care of that. Yes, some countries still have monarchy, but do the kings have total power of their citizens? I don't think so. Japan does have an emperor, but his connection to law is rather limited. Prime minister has more power in the government.Even in Saudi, the king is not allowed to make sharia laws. The work is actually done by Wahabbi group. I must still say that Saudi has absolute monarchy. It basically means around this time that they don't have anything called presidential election. Currently, most kings and emperors can show their power only through constitutional monarchy and that does not make them bigger than the positions created by laws of democracy. Absolute monarchy is not good for a country at least in this modern time.

The only good option is anarchy. :)

Not all kings are good and not all kings are bad either. Same with Presidents or Prime Ministers. It will still depend on the leader if the leader would like to be a good one. If the leader wants to be remembered by the good deeds and not for the bad ones or if the leader is thinking the good of his country. I agree with you on the royalty born. They may be evil or stupid but they will be King because of the blood. I do not think it should go that way. I was watching The Tudors and did a research on the real King Henry VIII and what I found out is not good. So it's better this way. The people can elect, the people can choose the power of the people can also end the terms of those evil ones.