Both appoint someone who is legally allowed to steal and kill others.
Must be nice, especially if your a sociopath.
Isn’t a king the government of his territory?
The king is dead, long live the king.
Frankly neither was ever appointed.
Actually a democratic government may be worse than a monarch since elected representatives have less incentive to guard the nation’s long-term health.
Since the glorious ancap utopia is a long way off (if at all ever existent) I’d rather take my chances living as the subject of a monarch than becoming a cradle to grave beast of burden for ‘the people’ guided by their collective ignorance, envy and bloodlust in the modern democratic state. Hans Hermann Hoppe’s analysis was spot-on in that regard. A single large property owner with a long-term interest in survival is a much better bet than parties of thugs and idiots swapping seats every five years or so…
The most ironic part about the democracy in the USA is that the original USA, the thirteen colonies declared independence from the monarch in England, took up arms and defended themselves against the English who did not want them to leave all over taxes, regulations and levies totalling about 3% of GDP. At last count the democratic government of the USA is spending over 20% of GDP.
" At last count the democratic government of the USA is spending over 20% of GDP."
It’s almost 30%, and you do realize that that’s about 42% of National income.
A few trillion here and a few trillion there, and suddenly you are talking about REAL MONEY!!!
The ironic part of the modified (Adjusted billion to trillion) quote is the adjective “REAL”. Money is just blips on a computer screen where real wealth gets diverted to friends of the Government and Federal Reserve thus making reality tougher to deal with for the rest of us.