Senate Member
Posts: 6,131 
April 14th, 2006, 01:54 PM
Even Canada is more corrupt than Britain.
Corruption rank (the lower the number, the less corrupt)
Finland ..1 (Republic)
Denmark ..3 (Monarchy)
New Zealand ..1 (Monarchy)
Sweden.. 5 (Monarchy)
Switzerland.. 6 (Republic)
Norway.. 7 (Monarchy)
Netherlands ..10 (Monarchy)
Australia ..8 (Monarchy)
United Kingdom 10 (Monarchy)
Canada ..12 (Monarchy)
Austria.. 9 (Republic)
Germany ..13 (Republic)
Belgium ..16 (Monarchy)
Ireland ..16 (Republic)
United States ..14 (Republic)
France.. 15 (Republic)
http://www.worldaudit.org/democracy.htm
By my calculations, of the ten least corrupt, seven of them are Constitutional Monarchies (with UK and Netherlands joint 10th) and only three are Republics.
And, on the same forum, you will see that out of the 10 most democratic nations on Earth, 8 are Constitutional Monarchies.
So, if you want Canada to become a Republic, go ahead.
Quoting
Compared to Germany, Italy, France and the US, with all their corruption, it's clean, and they are all republics. Britain is in the Top 10 least corrupt nations on Earth.
Oh stuff a sock in it Blackleaf. British politics is not clean. For heavens sake, man, stop deluding yourself.
Even Canada is more corrupt than Britain.
Corruption rank (the lower the number, the less corrupt)
Finland ..1 (Republic)
Denmark ..3 (Monarchy)
New Zealand ..1 (Monarchy)
Sweden.. 5 (Monarchy)
Switzerland.. 6 (Republic)
Norway.. 7 (Monarchy)
Netherlands ..10 (Monarchy)
Australia ..8 (Monarchy)
United Kingdom 10 (Monarchy)
Canada ..12 (Monarchy)
Austria.. 9 (Republic)
Germany ..13 (Republic)
Belgium ..16 (Monarchy)
Ireland ..16 (Republic)
United States ..14 (Republic)
France.. 15 (Republic)
http://www.worldaudit.org/democracy.htm
By my calculations, of the ten least corrupt, seven of them are Constitutional Monarchies (with UK and Netherlands joint 10th) and only three are Republics.
And, on the same forum, you will see that out of the 10 most democratic nations on Earth, 8 are Constitutional Monarchies.
So, if you want Canada to become a Republic, go ahead.
Senate Member
Posts: 6,131
April 14th, 2006, 02:13 PM
World's 16 most democratic nations.
Finland.. 1 (Republic)
Denmark.. 2 (Monarchy)
New Zealand ..3 (Monarchy)
Sweden.. 4 (Monarchy)
Switzerland.. 5 (Republic)
Norway ..6 (Monarchy)
Netherlands ..7 (Monarchy)
Australia.. 8 (Monarchy)
United Kingdom.. 9 (Monarchy)
Canada ..10 (Monarchy)
Austria ..11 (Republic)
Germany ..12 (Republic)
Belgium ..13 (Monarchy)
Ireland ..14 (Republic)
United States ..14 (Republic)
France ..16 (Republic)
www.worldaudit.org
Look at all those Monarchies in the Top 10 - EIGHT of them, and 4 of those have Queen Elizabeth II as their Monarch.
So how is living in a Republic "better" than living in a Constitutional Monarchy?
World's 16 most democratic nations.
Finland.. 1 (Republic)
Denmark.. 2 (Monarchy)
New Zealand ..3 (Monarchy)
Sweden.. 4 (Monarchy)
Switzerland.. 5 (Republic)
Norway ..6 (Monarchy)
Netherlands ..7 (Monarchy)
Australia.. 8 (Monarchy)
United Kingdom.. 9 (Monarchy)
Canada ..10 (Monarchy)
Austria ..11 (Republic)
Germany ..12 (Republic)
Belgium ..13 (Monarchy)
Ireland ..14 (Republic)
United States ..14 (Republic)
France ..16 (Republic)
www.worldaudit.org
Look at all those Monarchies in the Top 10 - EIGHT of them, and 4 of those have Queen Elizabeth II as their Monarch.
So how is living in a Republic "better" than living in a Constitutional Monarchy?
Senate Member
Posts: 6,131
April 16th, 2006, 04:40 AM
From a pro-monarchy New Zealand website -
MONARCHIES ARE GENERALLY BETTER OFF THAN REPUBLICS
An OECD survey has established that monarchies are on average wealthier, and more stable, than republics. Futhermore, the disruption caused by a change from a monarchy to a republic could cause adverse effects on trade, currency values, and overseas investment. The indirect cost to New Zealand of a republic could be enormous.
---------------------------
Other reasons why the Monarchy is good for New Zealand and everyone else -
MONARCHY NURTURES DEMOCRACY
A constitutional monarchy is not inconsistent with democracy. In fact it was the monarchy that created and sustained our democracy. With Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom we have the most democratic system of government in the world, largely due to the moderating influence of the shared monarchy.
PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE AGAINST THE ABUSES OF POLITICIANS
The monarchy strengthens the democratic process by denying absolute power to politicians. Although neither the Quenn nor the Governor-General exercises political power, they do have a significant role in the constitution. The strength of their position derives from the power they deny to others, rather than the power they exercise directly. The lesson of most republics is that an executive president would be more likely to be a cause of abuse than a safeguard against abuse by others.
A MILITARY COUP IS MUCH MORE LIKELY IN A REPUBLIC THAN A MONARCHY
A military coup or social revolution is less likely in a monarchy where the military swear allegiance to the Crown, than in a republic where they swear allegiance to either the state or the governing party. There are many instances of military forces or political factions in republics seizing power on the pretence of acting to defend the "Constitution", or the "State", or to protect the "People". No such false claim to legitimacy can ever be raised in New Zealand. The Crown provides the constitutional continuity and authority. This is lacking in most republics.
REPUBLIC IS MORE EXPENSIVE
A republic is likely to be much more expensive to operate than the monarchy. If a president was directly elected by the people the cost could be huge. The costs of advertising alone in the 2004 American elections amounted to a billion dollars. The process of creating a republic would be very costly.
http://www.geocities.com/cox_nz/no_argument.htm?200616
From a pro-monarchy New Zealand website -
MONARCHIES ARE GENERALLY BETTER OFF THAN REPUBLICS
An OECD survey has established that monarchies are on average wealthier, and more stable, than republics. Futhermore, the disruption caused by a change from a monarchy to a republic could cause adverse effects on trade, currency values, and overseas investment. The indirect cost to New Zealand of a republic could be enormous.
---------------------------
Other reasons why the Monarchy is good for New Zealand and everyone else -
MONARCHY NURTURES DEMOCRACY
A constitutional monarchy is not inconsistent with democracy. In fact it was the monarchy that created and sustained our democracy. With Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom we have the most democratic system of government in the world, largely due to the moderating influence of the shared monarchy.
PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE AGAINST THE ABUSES OF POLITICIANS
The monarchy strengthens the democratic process by denying absolute power to politicians. Although neither the Quenn nor the Governor-General exercises political power, they do have a significant role in the constitution. The strength of their position derives from the power they deny to others, rather than the power they exercise directly. The lesson of most republics is that an executive president would be more likely to be a cause of abuse than a safeguard against abuse by others.
A MILITARY COUP IS MUCH MORE LIKELY IN A REPUBLIC THAN A MONARCHY
A military coup or social revolution is less likely in a monarchy where the military swear allegiance to the Crown, than in a republic where they swear allegiance to either the state or the governing party. There are many instances of military forces or political factions in republics seizing power on the pretence of acting to defend the "Constitution", or the "State", or to protect the "People". No such false claim to legitimacy can ever be raised in New Zealand. The Crown provides the constitutional continuity and authority. This is lacking in most republics.
REPUBLIC IS MORE EXPENSIVE
A republic is likely to be much more expensive to operate than the monarchy. If a president was directly elected by the people the cost could be huge. The costs of advertising alone in the 2004 American elections amounted to a billion dollars. The process of creating a republic would be very costly.
http://www.geocities.com/cox_nz/no_argument.htm?200616
House Member
Posts: 4,564
Location: Minnesota: Gopher State
Location: Minnesota: Gopher State
May 28th, 2007, 10:19 AM
Monarchies preferable to or more prosperous than democracy or republics?
I guess it must be all that plunder that Queen Elizabeth stole from China or the Indian sub-continent. Or perhaps it was King Leopold stealing and killing in Congo. Or Ferdinand and Isabella doing the same in the Americas??
?
Monarchies preferable to or more prosperous than democracy or republics?
I guess it must be all that plunder that Queen Elizabeth stole from China or the Indian sub-continent. Or perhaps it was King Leopold stealing and killing in Congo. Or Ferdinand and Isabella doing the same in the Americas??
?
House Member
Posts: 3,382
May 28th, 2007, 01:49 PM
The problem with republics is, romantacism aside..
They have a very, very nasty habit (with majority odds) of becoming dictatorships. Constitutional Monarchies? Not so much. They very fact that no one takes the head of state seriously in a monarchy is its strongest feature.
My point is, when I hear people talk about monarchy and romanticism and the need for a republic, I am reminded of the pot calling the kettle black.
You keep your republican romantacism (anyone can be president! Ya right, anyone COULD be made king too), I'll keep my pragmatism.
The problem with republics is, romantacism aside..
They have a very, very nasty habit (with majority odds) of becoming dictatorships. Constitutional Monarchies? Not so much. They very fact that no one takes the head of state seriously in a monarchy is its strongest feature.
My point is, when I hear people talk about monarchy and romanticism and the need for a republic, I am reminded of the pot calling the kettle black.
You keep your republican romantacism (anyone can be president! Ya right, anyone COULD be made king too), I'll keep my pragmatism.
House Member
Posts: 3,382
May 28th, 2007, 01:52 PM
What about the French republics? No..they were all horrid. And lets not forget early 20th century American imperialism in the Phillipenes and Cuba (or its earlier exploits stealing from Natives)
Don't blame human nature on one minor group of people.
Quoting gopher
And what do you think Republics do? Like , Ida know..how about the First republic Rome? How was its rule? Peaceful or full of conquest and looting?
Monarchies preferable to or more prosperous than democracy or republics?
I guess it must be all that plunder that Queen Elizabeth stole from China or the Indian sub-continent. Or perhaps it was King Leopold stealing and killing in Congo. Or Ferdinand and Isabella doing the same in the Americas??
?
I guess it must be all that plunder that Queen Elizabeth stole from China or the Indian sub-continent. Or perhaps it was King Leopold stealing and killing in Congo. Or Ferdinand and Isabella doing the same in the Americas??
?
What about the French republics? No..they were all horrid. And lets not forget early 20th century American imperialism in the Phillipenes and Cuba (or its earlier exploits stealing from Natives)
Don't blame human nature on one minor group of people.
