this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2023
690 points (95.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

5914 readers
6439 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only if her children inherit the crown. Otherwise it's more like a benevolent dictatorship.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's a hereditary system. Historically monarchy were hereditary and life long, but succession can be by the will of the previous monarch, appointed, or even democratically elected.

Monarchy really only means that's there's one person at the top of a hierarchy. There can be few or many people below dealing with the actual work, and the responsibility of the system can be outlined by a constitution or absolute.

Most monarchies can behave as a dictatorship if the monarch acts as a dictator. Monarchy and Dictatorship are two terms for describing autocracies, and there's a lot of overlap between the two, but neither require or disallow hereditary succession, although monarchies usually end up with it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

By that definition isn't a presidency a monarchy?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Depends on the rest of the systems surrounding the president. The US president, for example, has some power to do things unilaterally, but much of what a president does must be approved by other branches of the government to take effect. In that sense, the president isn't the sole person at the top of the hierarchy, there's a few bodies that that power is split between.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

In addition to the other comment, company presidents are usually considered lower rank than CEOs, but also often don't answer directly to them.

A president usually presides over a group, like a board or a council, without direct power over technically lower rank individuals. If a president started micromanaging the cleaning staff, they'd probably be fired.

That being said, company structure varies wildly, and there are definitely company presidents that act more like kings and dictators. It's just a title after all, no one will arrest you if it's inaccurate.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Then what is the difference between a monarchy and a dictatorship?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly as your other comment finds, monarchies can be dictatorships if the monarch really takes control. The typical method of control tends to be different though, with monarcies often using traditional power (such as heredity and religion) and dictatorships usually being the result of military force (coups and conquerings).

I think the more useable difference is that a monarchy is a system ruled by a single person, while a dictatorship is a single person ruling. It depends on whether we're talking about an existing system of hierarchy or a person at the top; a leader vs, well, a dictator.

It's not common, but I'd bet a dictatorship that lasts long enough will become a monarchy or institue some form of oligarchy, while a monarchy could become a dictatorship without changing much; maybe reverting with the dictators passing or simply collapsing.

[–] SgtAStrawberry 2 points 1 year ago

I think an extremely simplified and easy way to put it is. A absolute monarchy is a monarchy until an asshole gets in charge, then its a dictatorship with a monarch as the leader.

[–] Everythingispenguins 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well I was curious and did a little reading. It seems mostly in name. Though Monarchies tend to have a dive right component where Dictatorships seem to more often arise from a coup d'etat.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I live in a monarchy (Sweden) but the King does not control the country, and there's no religious component to his position. I would not consider us a dictatorship.

[–] Everythingispenguins 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also as with most monarchs these days. They are no longer the seat of political power. I don't think most people would consider Sweden to be ruled by a monarch.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Maybe the difference is parliament. A dictatorship will have advisors and may delegate limited control to other entities however they are the 'final word' and the only opinion that cannot be circumvented. Traditional monarchies would have also been dictatorships. Modern monarchies delegate significant power to parliament in manners that can't be circumvented by their own will. So I'd say that the difference between a modern monarchy and a dictatorship is a democratically elected parliament that has power beyond the will of the monarch.

[–] aviationeast 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Aggravationstation 5 points 1 year ago

But it would be with service and devotion.