Thursday, September 27, 2012

Monarchy Musings from August

Royal World brings to our attention a defense of monarchy by Ray Wilson over at Ray Wilson writes:

The negative view of monarchy today is tied to the quasi sacred belief in the idea of “progress” in which history is viewed as a continuous marching forward, with advancements socially, culturally, technologically, one in which primitivity and barbarism is the starting point and civilization is a sort of eternal end point. The liberals and so called progressives label anything that is contrary to their own ideological leanings as “reactionary” or regressive as it is far easier to dismiss something as backwards than actually judge it on its own faults and merits.
The Sobornost quotes:
Russia needs to reunify with its canonical territories, first and foremost with Belarus and Ukraine, and elect an Orthodox monarch to lead the country to its former greatness.
Over at Chronicles Magazine, writes Clyde Wilson:
I know there are good British people who feel that their monarchy plays an important role as the embodiment of tradition, patriotism, and unity, and I must respect that. I know also that the criticism of the monarchy that comes from the Brit chattering classes is not motivated by moral outrage or democratic sentiment. It expresses the same envy and spite that energizes a similar type in America to hate the Confederate flag. Their nature is to suppress whatever is a remnant of earlier and better times that they fear they cannot fully control.
Over at Attack the System, it is written:
What about the communists screaming about the authoritarian nature of monarchism? They would need an authoritarian state to carry out their actions under the false promise that the state would somehow melt away. At least monarchism never makes such false claims, as Marxism does. Marxism does not lead to maximal liberty. Even if based upon a system of democracy, as the Trotskyites would want, this would become mob rule.

Everyone would think that they know just as well as anyone else what should be done. Can everyone simultaneously be an expert in politics, science, economics, and so on? Some people know more than others on these topics. A king would have been raised in political affairs his entire life by his predecessor. Nothing can compare.

No comments: