Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
Indeedy. As for "not being any corruption in a dictatorship".... Well, that's just plain false. Call it Royal Gifts or whatever you want to, it was still money given directly from the state treasury to the Monarch's obedient friends, instead of benefiting society, like the vast amount of the treasury in democracies are. Also, please do a quick google for <insert random dictator here>+"swiss bank account". Also, when the monarchs raided the treasury, nothing happened. When politicans do it.... Well, have a quick looky at England.

But the very notion that the elite should rule is inherently ridiculous. Why? Because when we give one group of people absolute power, and remove it from another group of people, it will inevitably lead to them cementing their own position and not allowing anyone else in, be it an aristocracy, an oligarky, communist party, whatever. The ruling elite will have no incentive to raise others up to their own class, while they have every reason to do the opposite, because the more you have to share your power, the less power you get yourself.
The point is that the British monarch doesn't rule. She heads the nation, but she doesn't govern the state. While it's arguable whether head of state is a necessary position, if we didn't have a monarch, the most likely model we'd be having would be something like the US, and having seen the reverence that Americans show for their President, I far prefer the status quo of a non-politico in that role.