King Arts
Well-known member
What? Why are you bringing modern nations into it like it proves anything? Lords said that "democracies are ALWAYS richer than tyrannies!"Yeah, yeah, and Saudi Arabia is richer than South Korea on per capita basis, but only one of these countries is an industrial and technological power. But if we're talking industrially rich, rather than exporting lots of expensive resources, you won't find any.
Who cares about industrialization he made a point about human history in general. Why can't a absolute monarchy be industrial and rich?
I'm arguing to the centrists and "moderates" here that support for globohomo and pedo rights does not make you richer or poorer.
What? What so big government is just how many people are employed by the government? What a retarded definition no one thinks of it as simply that.The big government of yesteryear are by hard figures smaller than the smaller governments of post-industrial era.
Back to today:
USA has a public sector of size similar to socialdemocracies like Portugal, Germany, Mexico, Turkey, South Africa or Denmark, while post communist and communist countries reach multiples of that.List of countries by public sector size - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
They think of it as a government that restricts people's freedom to do what they want. AKA killing you for fucking a man up the butt, killing you for not believing the right religion, killing you for insulting the leader.
Most historical nations in the Christian and Muslim world did not tolerate fucking other men, they would kill you for heresty or apostosy, and if you insult the king or sultan in a serious manner beheading was possible. Some of the more leniant ones might allow you to get away with drunken insults if you were a random peasant in a bar because it's not a big deal. But there was no freedom of speech, or religion, or privacy.
I mean inquisitions and witch burnings somehow respect the right to privacy come on?
So you just want a totalitarian government that rules on a whim, got it. Why don't you move to a country that has one? There are many...
Learn to read my friend, no I don't want my leaders to rule based soley on their whims because human whims are stupid. But if they decide that someone is an enemy/traitor the "security forces" of the time aka soldiers/inquisitors whatever would not have disobeyed the King if he ordered Duke Jackoff to be executed and his property taken from his family because "Oh the king is taking away the rights of the Duke!"That's called a regime change, explicitly advising against rule by whim.
Other nobles might take issue with it which is why you don't want to alienate your power base, but if a noble is actively treasonous, like for example helping the Ottomans invade then other nobles would be perfectly ok with the king taking away the traitor nobles property and giving it to them.