[QUOTE]Thailand’s 64-year-old Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn has asked for more time to mourn after his father’s death before taking the throne, with the BBC reporting that his coronation will not be held for at least a year.
In a televised address on Saturday night, junta leader Prayuth Chan-ocha conveyed the Crown Prince’s message to the public, according to Thai newspaper the Nation.
The statement came after General Prayuth and former Prime Minister Prem Tinsulanonda — who is standing in as regent — met with the Crown Prince at Dusit Palace.
“HRH the Crown Prince has mentioned an important thing, saying that people should have no confusion over the administration and succession to the throne since the process is clearly stated in the constitution and the palace law,” said Prayuth, according to the Nation. “It will happen when all people and he have passed the grieving time.”[/QUOTE]
[url]http://time.com/4532925/thailand-king-succession-crown-prince/?xid=tcoshare[/url]
What's the general opinion on the prince, you dudes like him or is he a shitter?
They all hate him, a lot, from what I've read
Prince is a rich dick. They like his sister though
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;51220875]They all hate him, a lot, from what I've read[/QUOTE]
Why?
So maybe the sister will kill the brother
[editline]18th October 2016[/editline]
MY AUTOMERGE
[QUOTE=Citrus705;51220884]Why?[/QUOTE]
Marrying multiple times, generally not living up to the expectation of a royal, disowning his children, holding lavish parties (in one case, a video emerged of a huge party for his pet poodle Foo Foo featuring his topless bar-girl ex-wife), living abroad a lot of the time, etc.
I think this picture speaks a thousand words. That dog in the picture holds the rank of "air chief marshal" by the way. Guess who promoted him...
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/FnsDgcn.jpg[/IMG]
if you liked the previous king why not let the monarchy die on a "high" note?
"I'm a worthless piece of shit and I want to delay the coronation as long as possible because then I'd have to actually do something"
i remember a video leaking of him telling his wife to drink water out of a water bowl while shes almost naked and wearing a leash.
No judgement on his personal sexual fetishes but this was surrounded with servants at an 'elites' public party...
[QUOTE=Swebonny;51220986]I think this picture speaks a thousand words. That dog in the picture holds the rank of "air chief marshal" by the way. Guess who promoted him...
[/QUOTE]
Time for a republic?
[QUOTE=Ta16;51221125]"I'm a worthless piece of shit and I want to delay the coronation as long as possible because then I'd have to actually do something"[/QUOTE]
the previous king delayed his coronation
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51221903]Time for a republic?[/QUOTE]
Thailand is a republic. The king has no legal authority. The military overthrows their democracy every 4 or 5 years. The last government was headed by a woman named Yingluck Shinawat and was overthrown over some economic policies I believe.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;51222236]Thailand is a republic. The king has no legal authority. The military overthrows their democracy every 4 or 5 years. The last government was headed by a woman named Yingluck Shinawat and was overthrown over some economic policies I believe.[/QUOTE]
Today I learned I live in a republic. Strange feeling, I guess. Monarchs with no authority doesn't automatically mean republic, you know.
[QUOTE=RB33;51222519]Today I learned I live in a republic. Strange feeling, I guess. Monarchs with no authority doesn't automatically mean republic, you know.[/QUOTE]
Strange, your flag dog says Sweden, not Thailand. Why do you seem to think Thailand and Sweden have the exact same kind of government?
[QUOTE=proboardslol;51222527]Strange, your flag dog says Sweden, not Thailand. Why do you seem to think Thailand and Sweden have the exact same kind of government?[/QUOTE]
You don't seem to be getting the point.
Sweden is not a republic. It has a monarchy. That does not mean, however, it is not a democracy.
Thailand is not a republic. It has a monarchy. That does not mean, however, it is necessarily either a democracy or not a democracy.
Ireland is a republic. It does not have a monarchy. That does not mean, however, it is not a democracy.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;51222236]Thailand is a republic. The king has no legal authority. The military overthrows their democracy every 4 or 5 years. The last government was headed by a woman named Yingluck Shinawat and was overthrown over some economic policies I believe.[/QUOTE]
A parliamentary monarchy is still a monarchy. Nobody would say that the United Kingdom is a republic.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51222575]You don't seem to be getting the point.
Sweden is not a republic. It has a monarchy. That does not mean, however, it is not a democracy.
Thailand is not a republic. It has a monarchy. That does not mean, however, it is necessarily either a democracy or not a democracy.
Ireland is a republic. It does not have a monarchy. That does not mean, however, it is not a democracy.[/QUOTE]
The limitations on the crown of European monarchies are totally different from the limitations of the crown in Thailand. You cant just pull one factor out and say that your governments are equal or even comparable. Why is Thailand [I]not[/I] a republic
[QUOTE=proboardslol;51222589]The limitations on the crown of European monarchies are totally different from the limitations of the crown in Thailand. You can just pull one factor out and say that your governments are equal. Why is Thailand [I]not[/I] a republic[/QUOTE]
Because, by definition, it can't be a republic, because it has a monarchy.
Look up the definition of a republic. Now look up the definition of a monarchy. I think you'll find they kind of, maybe, just a little bit, contradict each other.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51222602]Because, by definition, it can't be a republic, because it has a monarchy.
Look up the definition of a republic.[/QUOTE]
According to whom? Did Oxford invent the republic? Republic means, to me, a system or government in which the people elect representatives. When the king has no legal authority, they're not a monarch; they're simply a really special rich guy. Kings are kept around in Europe for cultural reasons, not political, though yes, it's true the queen of England, for example barely has political authority at all. Is a monarch really a monarch (rule by one) if they've got a large system of check and balances preventing them from ruling unilaterally? No, they're just an arbitrarily special person.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;51222623]According to whom? Did Oxford invent the republic? Republic means, to me, a system or government in which the people elect representatives. When the king has no legal authority, they're not a monarch; they're simply a really special rich guy. Kings are kept around in Europe for cultural reasons, not political, though yes, it's true the queen of England, for example barely has political authority at all. Is a monarch really a monarch (rule by one) if they've got a large system of check and balances preventing them from ruling unilaterally? No, they're just an arbitrarily special person.[/QUOTE]
You're literally inserting your own definition here that is backed up by nothing. If you want to keep arguing that Thialand is a republic, sure, go ahead, but don't be expected to be taken seriously, ever.
[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic#Head_of_state"]Read this, please.[/URL]
EDIT: ever heard of a constitutional monarchy? I'd love to see you argue with British Republicans that the United Kingdom is a republic. I think that'd be a hoot.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51222639]You're literally inserting your own definition here that is backed up by nothing. If you want to keep arguing that Thialand is a republic, sure, go ahead, but don't be expected to be taken seriously, ever.
[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic#Head_of_state"]Read this, please.[/URL][/QUOTE]
Okay then, so then how is a king with no legal authority a monarch? He's not; he's just a rich dickhead. The real leader of the country is elected (prime minister or president) while the royal family is simply a tourist attraction
[QUOTE=proboardslol;51222656]Okay then, so then how is a king with no legal authority a monarch? He's not; he's just a rich dickhead. The real leader of the country is elected (prime minister or president) while the royal family is simply a tourist attraction[/QUOTE]
Nothing, of what you said, has actually contradicted anything of what I've said. You're simply wrong. There's nothing I can do to prove that your wrong though since you've made up your own definitions that contradict every source I can find. Please, I am begging you, reconsider what you're saying.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51222639]You're literally inserting your own definition here that is backed up by nothing. If you want to keep arguing that Thialand is a republic, sure, go ahead, but don't be expected to be taken seriously, ever.
[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic#Head_of_state"]Read this, please.[/URL]
EDIT: ever heard of a constitutional monarchy? I'd love to see you argue with British Republicans that the United Kingdom is a republic. I think that'd be a hoot.[/QUOTE]
This is just a pedantic debate over the definition of republic, but he UK has representative democracy with an elected head of government. You're saying they're not a republic because they happen to shower some old lady with gifts because her daddy was a rich dude they showered with gifts? These people have little to no political significance, and at best cannot be considered a monarch sense they don't rule with unilateral, absolute authority.
[editline]18th October 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51222668]Nothing, of what you said, has actually contradicted anything of what I've said. You're simply wrong. There's nothing I can do to prove that your wrong though since you've made up your own definitions that contradict every source I can find. Please, I am begging you, reconsider what you're saying.[/QUOTE]
Made up my own definitions? Representatives elected with an elected head of state? I didn't make that up, it's literally in the Wikipedia page you posted lol
[QUOTE=proboardslol;51222670]Made up my own definitions? Representatives elected with an elected head of state? I didn't make that up, it's literally in the Wikipedia page you posted lol[/QUOTE]
There's a difference between head of government and head of state. A monarch/king/queen is the head of state, a prime minister is the head of government.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;51222670]This is just a pedantic debate over the definition of republic, but he UK has representative democracy with an elected head of government. You're saying they're not a republic because they happen to shower some old lady with gifts because her daddy was a rich dude they showered with gifts? These people have little to no political significance, and at best cannot be considered a monarch sense they don't rule with unilateral, absolute authority.
[editline]18th October 2016[/editline]
Made up my own definitions? Representatives elected with an elected head of state? I didn't make that up, it's literally in the Wikipedia page you posted lol[/QUOTE]
It states in my source "with no monarch most republics gave an elected head of state."
Read that again. "With no monarch."
So a republic by definition has no monarch.
Please provide a source where it says a state can be both a republic and have a monarchy. I will reply later - right n9w im on phone and so cant adequately reply.
head of government is basically synonymous with head of state
i don't think anyone cares about kings or princesses unless you're some 40 year old woman lmfao
[editline]18th October 2016[/editline]
also stop arguing semantics it's hilariously stupid
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51222871]It states in my source "with no monarch most republics gave an elected head of state."
Read that again. "With no monarch."
So a republic by definition has no monarch.
Please provide a source where it says a state can be both a republic and have a monarchy. I will reply later - right n9w im on phone and so cant adequately reply.[/QUOTE]
And a monarch is someone who rules unilaterally. Does any european country have a unilateral ruler?
Like holy shit scroll down two section on your own link:
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic#Ambiguities[/url]
[quote]The distinction between a republic and a monarchy is not always clear. The constitutional monarchies of the former British Empire and Western Europe today have almost all real political power vested in the elected representatives, with the monarchs only holding either theoretical powers, no powers or rarely used reserve powers. Real legitimacy for political decisions comes from the elected representatives and is derived from the will of the people. While hereditary monarchies remain in place, political power is derived from the people as in a republic. These states are thus sometimes referred to as crowned republics.[48][/quote]
Britain is not a republic, which it is by the logic of some of the above posters
That said, it also isn't a 'monarchy'
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
