tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7968761101230823169.post2102388062815643866..comments2023-07-09T16:20:55.860+02:00Comments on Today in Social Sciences...: The first Bourbons´ mental problemsPaqui Pérez Fonshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09825244803602259869noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7968761101230823169.post-6997533809994737082012-11-19T21:06:46.477+01:002012-11-19T21:06:46.477+01:00Hello Carmen,
That´s the point of this situation...Hello Carmen, <br /><br />That´s the point of this situation. Monarchy is this way: hereditary titles depend on the lottery of fortune and inbreeding gave kings a lot of possibilities of having either mental of physical problems. That´s why many enlightened philosophers defended a representative government. Voters can make mistakes and choose bad rulers, but the advantage is that if the elected rulers don´t work as they should or they have a shameful behaviour (such as Berlusconi in Italy), people can get rid of them in the following elections. We can´t do this with monarchs. <br /><br />Another important fact in this cases was that, as time went by, ruling a kingdom or an empire required a lot of knowledge and dedication and, as kings were normally not ready for those tasks, the people who worked for them started having a leading role in the administration. That´s why we know the names of many secretaries or ministers, who were more in charge of the government than the kings did. <br /><br />See you on Wednesday!Paqui Pérez Fonshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09825244803602259869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7968761101230823169.post-11021957094923840832012-11-19T19:31:40.645+01:002012-11-19T19:31:40.645+01:00I think that it's icredible that a person who ...I think that it's icredible that a person who had mental problems could be king of a big empire only because he was descendant of the nobles. If they couldn't look after themselves, how could they rule?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15475481881735024616noreply@blogger.com