Emancipatory Monarchy

Monarchy offends ideas of equality and progress. But it offers stability, continuity and ideally, exclusion of the cash & carry set from power. There is no social order free from corruption, but maintaining a dynasty whose fate and luxury are inextricably bound to the long-term welfare of the state is preferable to the short-sighted power of the strictly self-serving. As a enduring and proven centre of loyalty, dynastic monarchy also fends off destabilizing abstract centres of loyalty- ideals or tribalisms which either melt into air, lead to ethnic cleansing, or become simply fig leaves for private interest. Throughout history it has generally been the middle strata of society that has oppressed the masses most- the landlords, property owners and money lenders. The skill set which guarantees success for this ilk- traders, bankers and financiers is sociopathy; letting nothing, no principle nor anything sacred stand between oneself and profit. A martial nobility at least traditionally kept a code of honour. Radical emancipatory theories, whether communist, anarchist or libertarian run up against the problem that some segments of society will always express the otherwise latent human will to power; if a power vacuum or ‘completely horizontal power structure’ is created, mafia organizations will inevitably form and establish control by force. Monarchism is a way of managing this impulse, which is innate to and inextricable from human nature. It remains possible and necessary to pursue social justice within this constraint.
George Orwell:
“The function of the King in promoting stability and acting as a sort of keystone in a non-democratic society is, of course, obvious. But he also has, or can have, the function of acting as an escape-valve for dangerous emotions. A French journalist said to me once that the monarchy was one of the things that have saved Britain from Fascism. What he meant was that modern people can’t, apparently, get along without drums, flags and loyalty parades, and that it is better that they should tie their leader-worship onto some figure who has no real power. In a dictatorship the power and the glory belong to the same person. In England the real power belongs to unprepossessing men in bowler hats: the creature who rides in a gilded coach behind soldiers in steel breast-plates is really a waxwork. It is at any rate possible that while this division of function exists a Hitler or a Stalin cannot come to power. On the whole the European countries which have most successfully avoided Fascism have been constitutional monarchies.”
“But the affection shown for George V at the Silver Jubilee was obviously genuine, and it was even possible to see in it the survival, or recrudescence, of an idea almost as old as history, the idea of the King and the common people being in a sort of alliance against the upper classes…”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s