Wow, what a debate. Mig puts in a ten sentence paragraph and tito just answers BS.
Yeah because it was a idiotic claim, here is the list of constitutional monarchies in Europe:
Belgium Denmark Liechtenstein Luxembourg Monaco Netherlands Norway Spain Swaziland Sweden
Only an idiot would claim that these countries are more problematic/unstable then the republics of Europe.
You're comparing BiH to nations like Sweden? Dude are you totaly off the reservation, or are you just too much of a stubborn fucktard to realize that BiH has more problems than even a Dictatorship couldn't fix. Listen to yourself. What the hell kind of hallucinogen must you have been on to argue against something like that.
You can close your eyes to reality but not to memories. - Stanisław Jerzy Lec
Technocracy : A form of government in which scientists and technical experts are in control; "technocracy is described as that society in which those who govern justify themselves by appeal to technical experts who justify themselves by appeal to scientific forms of knowledge". A governmental or organizational system where decision makers are selected based upon how highly knowledgeable they are, rather than how much political capital they hold.
A technocratic government is a government of experts designed to ensure administrative functions are carried out efficiently. Technocracy can, in theory, take many forms and incorporate many systems of government. Technocracy may come about as a provisional form of oligarchy, in which the economy is regulated by economists, social policy is decided by political scientists, the health care system is run by medical professionals, with the branches of the government working together and sharing knowledge to maximize the performance of each in as equal a way as is feasible. Technocracy is often thought of as 'administration of scientists and engineers.
This would be the best solution.
Last Edit: Sept 5, 2008 16:50:50 GMT -5 by Demonel
Post by markosijekira on Sept 6, 2008 0:16:51 GMT -5
The difference between European monarchies and Bosnia is that all the European monarchies, have been such for their whole history as nation states, which means there is a long tradition of monarchical heads of state, and ruling houses dating back for centuries. It’s hard to even classify Bosnia today as a nation state in the modern sense since it never really went through the kind of development and self awareness that say western countries went through. Bringing in some distant relatives of a medieval royal house to establish a new royal house seems just silly.
There have to be some better alternatives to the present system, but establishing a faux Kingdome is hardly one of them.
The difference between European monarchies and Bosnia is that all the European monarchies, have been such for their whole history as nation states, which means there is a long tradition of monarchical heads of state, and ruling houses dating back for centuries. It’s hard to even classify Bosnia today as a nation state in the modern sense since it never really went through the kind of development and self awareness that say western countries went through. Bringing in some distant relatives of a medieval royal house to establish a new royal house seems just silly.
There have to be some better alternatives to the present system, but establishing a faux Kingdome is hardly one of them.
That's a nice way of saying it.
Another way to say it is that Bosnia is an artificial post-cold war creation of a country, that has practically nothing to do with the Christian kingdom of the Middle Ages and that, in its attempt to be like other EUROPEAN countries, engages in debates which are not appropriate to its situation. Serbia can have a debate like this (although very few support the return of the monarchy in any way). Bosnia having this debate is straight-up ridiculous.
Only if they can be 100% sure that the person is a descendant of our royal family and he is educated and actually gives a damn about Bosnia. I believe Bosniaks would support this more than Croats or Serbs ever would, even if that means a Catholic is head of state.
No....let me rephrase that.
No way in hell would Serbs support it but many Croats might and it would probably get the hardliners in Hercegovina to cool the F off.
Kars is a reigon of Turkey bordering Armenia. There is no chance some theoretical descendant would be a Catholic.
Wow, what a debate. Mig puts in a ten sentence paragraph and tito just answers BS.
Yeah because it was a idiotic claim, here is the list of constitutional monarchies in Europe:
Belgium Denmark Liechtenstein Luxembourg Monaco Netherlands Norway Spain Swaziland Sweden
Only an idiot would claim that these countries are more problematic/unstable then the republics of Europe.
Belguim has a strong seperatist movement in it's two halves and is likely to split in the future.
Luxembourg is a mono-ethnic state with many foreigners living their often for task purposes who have no loyalty to the crown.
Same with Liechtenstein and Monaco.
Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden are all mono-ethnic states experience major problems with immigrant populations -- especially Muslims.
Spain is one of the few countries with a more complicated constitutional structure then Bosnia, and only multi-ethnic state in Western Europe. Has active seperatist movements throughout the country, including ETA an active terrorist group, experiencing problems with Muslim immigrants. At to that that less then 50% of Spaniards support the king and those who do are almost guaranteed to be Castillians. Also, the stability of the state has little or nothing to do with the King but with the Spanish miracle under Fransisco Franco and EU membership.
Swaziland is one of the worlds poorest states, has an aid prevailance rate of 40%, has been experiencing negative economic growth ever since the monarch took power and is held afloat by South African government money -- basically it's a small version of Zimbambwe a few years ago.
To those who think a monarchy unites Belguim, it should be said that most Belguims believe there is a strong probabiluity that their state will cease to exist and the number of Waloons (south Belguim/French Belguim) who would want to join France has increased from 295 to 49%, and the party that obtained the most votes in the last election was the Flemish independence party.
49% of Walloons want to see their region join France if Belgium should cease to exist. That is at least 20% more than a similar survey of less than a year ago showed, the Flemish newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws reported (30 July 2008). Furthermore: 60% of the French want to see the Walloons do this, as polls by the Brussels newspaper Le Soir and the Northern France paper La Voix du Nord show. Currently 40% of all the large companies in Wallonia are in French hands, Walloons tune into French TV channels and they are culturally speaking much closer to France than to Flanders.