>>it [democracy] is working just fine for about 1% of the world's population! :-/

No it isn't, because it doesn't exist anywhere in the world at the moment

>>Monarchy worked for millenia
Now there's a system that works for around 1% of the population

>>Education under Capitalism/Democracy is nothing but brainwashing
OK, education under capitalism (not democracy, as we know that it doesn't exist) includes a large chunk of brainwashing, but it isn't 'nothing but brainwashing'
Education under capitalism necessarily includes a degree of technical education, so that the workers can be more technically proficient, and therefore more profitable. (Even literacy and numeracy count as technical education - don't take these basic things for granted, its more than any monarchs ever provided - for the population of Britain at least)

Quoting JS Mill on state education is hardly bringing in an unbiased observer
(By quoting Mill on this, you put yourself in the company of vile thatcherites like Keith Josephs)
State education under capitalism exists for the benefit of the interests of capital, but that doesn't mean that it is entirely without benefit for those who experience it.

On the whole, capitalism is a crock of shite, to be opposed at every turn, but it has done some good, partly in that the ownership and control of labour power under capitalism is distributed almost equally among individuals (This is not an unmitigated good, nor has it come without cost, particularly the concentration of ownership of the means of production) but probably the single greatest advance that can be attributed to the emergence of capitalism is the effective end of monarchies in all (properly) capitalist countries.

Hrant, give it up man - or you'll be coming over here to live in Bournemouth with all the other daily mail reading, tory voting, news believing blue rinse old ladies...

Nothing exists in a pure state. Not Democracy, not Capitalism, not Monarchy. What people think is the main thing. Americans are willing to kill Iraqis to force them to adopt democracy. Why? Because it goes along with the package: TV, Capitalism, McDonalds, the works.

A benign monarch serves much more of the population than any other system.

It's good that you dislike Capitalism, but you also have to realize that it subverts everything to its will. Democracy for example is used to give the illusion of power, hence reducing real power. And public education is used to brainwash. And freedom of speech is the best way to reduce desire for action. etc. etc. etc. The whole Western experiment of society is failing, face it. What do you expect when the whole thing is descended from a people who raped women with bulls in front of thousands of paying spectators? The West teaches respect for the Romans - barbarians.

BTW, I don't vote. I'm not qualified, and it validates this murderous system. I will have nothing to do with it, except follow the least amount of laws to avoid personal hardship.

hhp

>>>>The problem with Democracy is in fact this: since the laymen (that includes me) is not really qualified to determine matters of state (just like our clients are not qualified to design their own fonts - and good clients realize this), telling him he is qualified only serves to deceive him into supporting the system
Maybe the "laymen" isn't qualified but who is ? The king because he is born king ? The one who studied policy ? But there isn't one ultimate idea of what should be policy, as i now

> there isn't one ultimate idea of what should be policy

Yes, the longevity of a system depends on its adaptability.

> letting the different possibilities being tested.

Nothing is being tested. What's going on is murder and theft, perpetrated by... democracies!

> promoting liberty, equality

Ok, thoses Dreams, as you say, are used as tools for something else. But is ther any other system that don't use them and only try to magnify them ? Monarchy you think?
We can say a lot of things about how the democraty doesn't play as it should. But i don't see another system doing better.
A quick note : liberty, equality, are purely human. They're matter of languages, concepts, that is nothing else than human.

> i don't see another system doing better.

Where have you looked?

--

Liberty from what, exactly?
Do you realize for example that there's such a thing in human nature as Freedom from Choice as well?

Equality? Nothing is equal. What we need is decency.

Or in the mumbled words of the old beggar I would see every time I passed in front of Hotel Armenia in Republic Plaza: "Mere kounem angakhoutian" - literally: "May I fukc independence's mother."

Fancy, idealistic concepts are not what humans need most.
Especially when they're used as a ruse to implement the exact opposite!

hhp

You want some on-topic type stuff?

Come out of a metro in Yerevan, and you'll see Soviet-era Armenian lettering in a glorious, authentic style, in bronze. Walk out into the street, and you'll see "free-market" donut shops with vynil lettering in a Cooper Black rendering of the Armenian alphabet.

This is your culture? Well yes, it is, isn't it. Sickening.

hhp

>>you also have to realize that it [capitalism] subverts everything to its will

You don't have to tell me that

>>Democracy for example is used to give the illusion of power

I'll put it in CAPS in case you missed it before:
DEMOCRACY IS NOT USED FOR ANYTHING BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST.
The ILLUSION of democracy may be used for many things, but that's a different issue

You always seem to think that anyone who thinks anything different from you is a defender of the west, capitalism, the war on Iraq, helvetica, child murder, jerry springer, mcdonalds, bush, blair and everything else from earwax to sheep worrying.
We're not, nor are we any less thoughtful, or any more brainwashed than you are, and its patronising (as well as just plain wrong) to suggest otherwise.

Now, lets move on.
You want a monarch.
OK, who?
(If your answer is 'I'm not qualified to decide', then give us some idea who is, as well as what we might expect to happen when that monarch dies, abdicates etc)

You want a monarch.
OK, who?

"Whoever doesn't want the job" may be the best qualification. Going along with the maxim that anyone who desires power enough to achieve it is ill-suited to use it. That in itself may be democracy's failing.

Paul

Steve, the mechanics would indeed be tricky. But I think it would be doable, and worth the bumpy road there. The precondition of course is for the masses to realize its necessity.

Who?
Somebody between like 40 and 60 years old, filthy rich through family wealth (as opposed to personal acquisition), high IQ, preferably good health, and most of all with good parents. A cool head and a warm heart.

hhp

I have to say "no fecking way" on the monarcy front, Hrant. But then I'm Irish and I've been trained to froth at the mouth whenever I see photos of the queen.

Democracy works to a certain extent (sorry Steve) if the scale is reduced to a minimum. On the level of a village or a small town, it functions a hell of a lot better than on the scale of a very big country. It's not perfect but it beats the hell out of monarchy.

Did we really need those caps, Steve? Why not apply the "Ok, now what?" shite to yourself. If your not in bed yet and you're up to it, give us the benefit of your own wisdom.

M.

Matha:
>This is where it all breaks down.
>We cannot 'know' anything objectively. The tools
>we use to define 'reality' and search for 'truth'
>were created by us. Nothing is objectively
>true'. Everything is culturally determined.

That's just bollocks - I have to agree with John Butler here. But I don't think it's anything to do do with being left wing, it's just a weak argument.

Hrant:
&#6