America can we try a monarchy (serious question)

[Mariatenebre]

No you wouldn't. In Imperial Russia or China, you would have been ostracized and despised. In feudal Japan who knows about trans people but bucking the rigid caste and patriarchal hierarchy would have cost you your head.

You do realize I said the rulers themselves not the societies they lived in.

Plus with Catherine though she played the game to win power from the Church there is good evidence that she honestly didn't believe in Christianity. She questioned it from a young age and once remaked that "She would rather read Voltaire then the Bible." Plus one of her good friends was a closeted gay ruler of Prussia and Catherine like him lived a hedonistic sex life.

Likewise in China while they had their periods of more homophobic times they also had cross dressers, eunuchs and besides that in many eras homosexual love wasn't seen as evil or stigmatized. It was again more about marrying to bring honor to your family to quote the movie Mulan but you could have gay affairs on the side. China even had a God of Homosexuality and even gay marriage Tuer Shen who's cult the Communists along with the Muslims and Christians have long tried to stamp out.

Likewise in many eras Japan was less hung up about the gay stuff then China. Of the three unifiers of Japan Nobunaga Oda, Hideyoshi Toytomi and Ieyasu Tokugawa ALL had gay lovers on the side and again there has always been a cross dresser and eunuch tradition.

 

[Kulindahr]

"Proper Kings" were authoritarian tyrants, that's why it took all those bloody revolutions to take their power away. It's the fake kinds and historical relics that just sit about and do nothing.

Besides, if we were to have a King of any kind, it would not end up being the fabulous, Black, Queen of JUB.

It would be some uptight prudish, 'phobic, probably racist white guy.

But we'd have to be politically correct and find someone with the same proportions of white, black, native, Latino, and Asian blood as the country as a whole.

 

[Kulindahr]

... if it is hereditary, you will throw up more fools than geniuses, and publicly funded support of primogeniture is indeed going backward, and that too, is absolutely political - just like all the Monarchies of Europe when they began their existence.

Go with tanistry*, not primogeniture: everyone out to second cousins of the next generation would be eligible, but they'd first have to pass qualifications: a B.S. in constitutional law, at least a Master's Degree in something useful (eg. STEM, history), four years of national service (military preferred, but Peace Corps would do), substantial charity work, and I'd throw in participation in a college sport. That would narrow the field.

Also require that they marry someone whose primary race/ethncity is not the same as theirs.

How to choose among the qualified candidates? Maybe have hereditary Electors as the Holy Roman Empire did, or draw straws as was done in some ancient near eastern cultures. Though thinking of Electors, allow anyone who donates $10 billion to the country to be an Elector for just one election. Or have a half dozen different ways of doing it but draw randomly to decide which will apply for a given succession.



*Several monarchies in Europe actually started that way but primogeniture took over.

 

[Kulindahr]

So would each state have its own king?
Then at the federal level you'd have the king of kings??

Nah, just put the word "royal" in front of "governor" and keep things as they are.

 

[TX-Beau]

You do realize I said the rulers themselves not the societies they lived in.

Plus with Catherine though she played the game to win power from the Church there is good evidence that she honestly didn't believe in Christianity. She questioned it from a young age and once remaked that "She would rather read Voltaire then the Bible." Plus one of her good friends was a closeted gay ruler of Prussia and Catherine like him lived a hedonistic sex life.

Likewise in China while they had their periods of more homophobic times they also had cross dressers, eunuchs and besides that in many eras homosexual love wasn't seen as evil or stigmatized. It was again more about marrying to bring honor to your family to quote the movie Mulan but you could have gay affairs on the side. China even had a God of Homosexuality and even gay marriage Tuer Shen who's cult the Communists along with the Muslims and Christians have long tried to stamp out.

Likewise in many eras Japan was less hung up about the gay stuff then China. Of the three unifiers of Japan Nobunaga Oda, Hideyoshi Toytomi and Ieyasu Tokugawa ALL had gay lovers on the side and again there has always been a cross dresser and eunuch tradition.

I had someone once try to tell me that women were common and accepted in Medieval European armies because - Joan of Arc. Which is of course ridiculous. Your logic is much the same.

 

[Essex Boy]

Plus with Catherine though she played the game to win power from the Church there is good evidence that she honestly didn't believe in Christianity. She questioned it from a young age and once remaked that "She would rather read Voltaire then the Bible." Plus one of her good friends was a closeted gay ruler of Prussia and Catherine like him lived a hedonistic sex life.

And that's why she's known as Kate the Great.

 

[Mariatenebre]

I had someone once try to tell me that women were common and accepted in Medieval European armies because - Joan of Arc. Which is of course ridiculous. Your logic is much the same.

And again I never said that. I specifically referred to the women themselves or women like them not the cultures they lived in.

However Queens in Russia were a bit more common though still very patriarchal. Likewise China was fiercely patriarchal though more accepting of LGBT people then any Christian country but Wu still got her power.

Now Japan on the other hand had varying degrees of patriarchy vs. egalitarianism. Honestly in many eras of Japan women had more power, rights etc then they did in Europe. This was especially true in Heian Period Japan and The Warring States period had quite a few female Daimyo and warriors despite the patriarchy. Besides Lady Nata you also had female Daimyos who led their own clans like Naotora Ii, Ginchiyo Tachibana etc.

Plus Joan had to go against Church Regulations and was even executed as a Witch even though the Catholic Church basically declared a oopsie and made her a Saint. Where as in Japan especially you had cults dominates by women.

Likewise Lady Nata just so you know fought against the Christianization of Japan including against the Portuguese and their fifth column Daimyos including her own ex husband Sorin Otomo. Many people make a stink about how the Japanese "persecuted Christians" but they ignore that Portugal bankrolled Catholic Daimyos who persecuted their non Christian subjects and killed those who wouldn't convert so this persecution was reactive if anything else. Lady Nata however besides being a Daimyo was also a Warrior and a Priestess to the Japanese God of War and Divination Hachiman. It was her efforts in stopping Christian Imperialism as to why Japan is still not a Christian nation. She was so hated by the Christians that they even called her Jezebel as an insult even though unlike the Biblical Jezebel. Japan's Jezebel won and they are better off for it.