The monarchical system vs Democracy_ Weighing the pros and the cons.
In case you didn’t already know, monarchical and aristocratic families are the only groups in the world who enjoy absolute power over their respective societies and nations. Through centuries, they have refined their control over societies and nations to such an extent that they now seem to be the only institutions that still believe in the concept of freedom. The problem is not just that their power gives them great influence over their respective societies and nations but also because it allows them to control everything from the use of resources to the political freedoms of their subjects. But of course, I’m not talking about freedom here; I’m talking about total control and domination. If a family is ruled by a monarchical family or an aristocratic family, you can pretty much be sure that they will control whatever they want whenever they want without regard for anyone else.
If you’re a democratic person, this might appeal to you because you believe in democracy and want to see government rules and laws worked at the local level instead of at the national level. But if you want to live in a country where you don’t have any say whatsoever, that’s another thing altogether. For example, if you’re a native of Nepal, you’ll find yourself struggling every time your family needs something from the government. How often do they sell off some of the natural resources or the resources that your people depend on? Well, they don’t sell them to the locals themselves so they have to go through the local officials first.
On the other hand, if you’re an aristocratic family living in a society which is ruled directly by a monarch, you’ll find that the government rules your life. You’re either completely free to do as you please or you have to be prepared to follow the orders of the higher ’ems.’ The fact is that the monarchies which exist in most parts of the world today aren’t really independent. They’re more like satellite countries within a global system, and their location has been established quite naturally through the ages. It would be impossible for someone living in Nepal to imagine life governed by a monarch, even though that person could travel to Nepal and see the true picture of the place.
Of course, no one is actually forced to live under a monarchy. Nobody chooses to live in a country ruled by a monarch. This is not because nobody wants to, or because nobody can. It’s just not part of their natural gene pool. Monarchy in itself is a preferable arrangement for a great many people, and this is no different with Nepal. If you’ve never seen a picture of Nepal before, it’s time to change that.
The problem with a monarchical system of government is that it tends to breed corruption and cronyism. The current government in Nepal is riddled with graft and patronage, and any opportunity for graft is immediately taken advantage of. Those who are in government or running businesses, who know that they’re personally benefited from the actions of the king and queen, will always take care to see that they do as little as possible to upset the apple cart. The small business owners who’ve taken loans and advances from the government generally won’t mind seeing the government take control of the resources so they can repay them later. These same people will also tend to patronize those who have access to important political positions, such as members of the royal family and other aristocrats.
The only reason you’ll find the Nepalese governing any type of country with a monarchy is because they’re the only ones with the resources to do so. They are people who have lived for thousands of years without having organized government, and they are used to living with the concept of absolute rule. In a truly functioning, democratic society, those who enjoy the benefits of living in a free society will tend to be against it, and they have every right to be. Those who would like absolute rule over those they are governing, however, just hate democracy.
There are two main points that we must look at when debating the monarchical system vs democracy. The first point deals with the different types of rulers that existed in ancient times. If we’re going to play the game of politics, then we need to have some kind of check on who has power, what type of leaders they are, and who rules from a standpoint of power and not by popularity. In monarchies, everyone has power, but very little is actually decided by popular vote or the will of the masses. The checks and balances that are in place are there to prevent one man from absolute rule.
The second thing to note is that all these groups want is their freedom. They say that everyone has the right to be ruled, but if you ask those who live in a democracy, they will tell you that they want more individual freedom, because they understand that a true and legitimate form of government can only exist in a community where people are allowed to be themselves and express their freedoms and not be oppressed by others. Without individual freedom, all this is just a sham, and the people cannot realize that they are being ruled by someone else. With monarchies though, all this is prevented, because the ruler is elected and people get to vote for who they want to serve as king or queen. There is no real freedom of thought in a democracy, because you cannot discuss different opinions with your neighbors and fellow citizens.