Re:China Bans the Word 'Leica' on Social Media
by chongli on Sunday April 21, 2019 @03:05PM
(#19713880)
The monarchies of old changed hands and flipped over due to war (civil and otherwise) so often that they're not really comparable to a modern state dictatorship. Tons of monarchs had extremely short reigns, far less stable than the Chinese Communist party.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:China Bans the Word 'Leica' on Social Media
by joe_the_user on Sunday April 21, 2019 @04:37PM
(#19714431)
Also, monarchies began in an era when the state generally was far less developed than it is now. The number of state functionaries and the control they exert was far less.
Louis the 14th of France was one of the first Western kings to have something like dictatorial control of a country rather than being quite dependent on the nobles formally under him (as those nobles were in turn dependent on their vassals).
Re:China Bans the Word 'Leica' on Social Media
by stcredzero on Sunday April 21, 2019 @03:19PM
(#19713968)
In that case, is it really valid to count those monarchs as different governments and not continuations of the same system?
Re:China Bans the Word 'Leica' on Social Media
by chongli on Sunday April 21, 2019 @03:28PM
(#19714025)
Yes. It's completely valid, since their borders, their laws, and the identities of the people were constantly in flux. Nothing at all like the continuity of modern nation states through successive governments.
Re:China Bans the Word 'Leica' on Social Media
by stcredzero on Monday April 22, 2019 @12:37PM
(#19720334)
Yes. It's completely valid, since their borders, their laws, and the identities of the people were constantly in flux.
You've both made a good point and refuted the absolutist position at the same time. In general, if monarchs change and the borders, the laws, and the identities of the people remain the same, then it's really a continuation of the same regime. Really, "it depends."