many political scientists have recently argued that democracy, whether parliamentary or presidential, is not the best form of argument. what they consider the best form of government is constitutional monarchy. by constitutional monarchy, they mean a system in which the following are true: the monarch does not have executive power in terms of directing policies, but holds dismissive powers over the government. this scheme does two things: it prevents a tyrannical monarch, and it prevents the chaotic impacts of premature democracy and sectarian politics. these intellectuals look at the Scandinavian countries, and Spain as prime examples of their arguments for constitutional monarchy.
what do you guys think?