Show HN: Pinggy – A free RSS reader for the web (pinggy.com)
4 points by vasanthv 11h ago 0 comments
Show HN: MP3 File Editor for Bulk Processing (cjmapp.net)
27 points by cutandjoin 2d ago 17 comments
Vatican to cut phone signal during conclave to elect new pope
5 pseudolus 5 5/6/2025, 1:47:26 AM theguardian.com ↗
Secondly, that “absolute monarchial” system is quite impeded by the current lack of a monarch, and therefore operates on strict rules where not a lot of said rules can be changed or revoked, only carried out. There is, in fact, no dictator at all to dictate anything, only a devolved sort of “regency” keeping things intact until a new election can be accomplished.
that was never implied, and the question parent posited was never answered.
Given the world landscape, and the obvious and apparent trend towards democratization by nearly all of the worlds' actors -- it's a curiosity why this trend hasn't seemed to grab at the Vatican.
There are plenty of ancient/old organizations that have reorganized their political and internal structures to abide recent trends, it's at the very least interesting that the Vatican has moved so slowly in deciding what to keep and what to toss. We have seen plenty of monarchies transition into other organizations, it's not somehow rare -- but the Vatican has resisted this; it's interesting and worthy of discussion.
The other fact, that Popes not long ago enjoyed significant temporal power over the Papal States and Holy Roman Empire, shows that the Papacy has indeed been one of the most dynamic and enduring forms of governance in the world.
I fail to see why anyone, especially inconsequential worthless outsiders, would demand that they “go with the flow” and become democratic, for no particular reason, other than it is the new hotness in the world and it may help you win Sid Meier games?
I don't find it obvious that a church (with a "higher calling") should necessarily follow trends by secular governments with different purposes. As best I understand (being not a Catholic), The Vatican is not a frail government at risk of being overthrown by discontented citizens but rather a representative of divine authority to its "citizens" (i.e. Catholics worldwide). Why would it need to change its governmental structure to follow trends in secular governments?
I'm also unsure what to think of the idea that "nearly all the world's actors" are democratized. While most countries are nominally republics in some fashion, it's probably too simplistic to think they are all similarly democratized. For example, Russia is on Wikipedia's list of "presidential-parliamentary" governments[0] but in practice it's likely a pure dictatorship.
As an aside, there is an interesting report from Varieties of Democracy[1] indicating that world governments are roughly split 50/50 between democratic and autocratic implementations but 71% of the worlds population are under the latter[2]. I don't know this organization, but they look legitimate at a cursory glance and thinking about the numbers in terms of affected population is interesting. The "apparent trend towards democratization" may not be as apparent as you think?
> We have seen plenty of monarchies transition into other organizations, it's not somehow rare -- but the Vatican has resisted this
This is not surprising? I might need to read more history books but it seems like other monarchies, including ones where the head of state is also the head of a church, have an actual state to manage. The Vatican (again, I might just be uninformed) seems to be just a church? It answers to a deity, not its members, and has no purpose other than the perpetuation of its deity's mission. It is a sovereign City State, but no meaningful trade or military footprint. Contrast that with the British monarchs who ran the Church of England but also _The British Empire_.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_system_of... [1] https://v-dem.net/about/ [2] https://v-dem.net/documents/43/v-dem_dr2024_lowres.pdf