Dutch Abdication

Today Her Majesty Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands abdicates in favor of her eldest son.

The Mad Monarchist gave his thoughts on Queen Beatrix and the Netherlands right after the abdication was announced. Shortly thereafter the same blog did a piece on the republican traditions of the Netherlands.

Orange Emasculation

The Dutch monarch has been further stripped of powers. So reported the Irish Times three months ago.

The Grand Duke of Luxembourg

More reduction of the Grand Duke's powers are under way along with reductions in bank secrecy protection. So the New York Times reports.


H/T: Royal World

The Luxembourg Case

The Station Network reports that an initiative to have a referendum on the constitutional powers of the Grand Duke of Luxembourg failed, and that the legislators voted unanimously to reduce the Grand Ducal powers last month.

Catholic News Agency reports that the euthanasia bill has been passed.

Over at the Remnant, Brian McCall, seemingly not totally updated on the history and status of European monarchs' powers in real and formal terms, gives his thoughts on the issue.

Gerald Warner Backs the Grand Duke

Over at the Telegraph, the great High Scots Tory Gerald Warner defends the Grand Duke of Luxembourg.

By the way, Gerald Warner's Scotsman Sunday column has been revived. Whereas 4 columns totally ran from late June to October. Gerald Warner's column has been running for the Scotsman every Sunday since November 16.

Support the Grand Duke!

Support for the Grand Duke of Luxembourg has been all over the blogosphere lately.

Now there is a petition up for support to His Royal Highness.

You may even add your own personal message.

Of course, you may choose to state whether your support is for the Grand Duke's stand against euthanasia, the threatened Grand Ducal prerogative, or both.

Apparently, the petition is for persons of all nations.

By all means, please do feel free to sign.

By the way, even though the Parliament of the Grand Duchy has voted on a constitutional amendment, I hear there has to be another vote in a few months, or a referendum.

The Grand Duke

As was reported earlier this month, His Royal Highness the Grand Duke of Luxembourg stood up against an euthanasia bill. The Prime Minister was quite quick in responding that the Constitution had to be amended.

Constitutional democracy is a joke. We are told in wonderful speeches how democracy is “something more than majority rule” and that constitutional democracy is a democracy where a constitution limits the powers of the majority. But, once a real check on majority rule materializes, apparently that check has to be removed.

Now, the Parliament has passed the constitutional amendment just this week. So the Independent reports.

Such an important issue, and a constitutional amendment is passed in less than two weeks.

Invasion of Belgium

Le Fleur de Lys too has a post on the German invasion of Belgium 94 years ago today. There's also a post on the invasion of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg 5 days earlier. And there's one on the costs of the war.

Dutch Historian Wants Further Emasculation

Dutch historian Lamber Giebels believes the constitutional role currently played by the Dutch monarch is at odds with the nature of a true parliamentary democracy. So Radio Netherlands Worldwide reports.

It certainly is at odds with Wilsonian democracy, and I would add that that's definitely not a bad thing. Perhaps the Dutch historian needs to be reminded that modern, absolute democracy did not emerge because it was some objectively better arrangement, but because revolutions, wars, and political battles were fought? And that the winners did not emerge as winners because they had the objective truth or good on their side?

It seems historian Lambert Giebels wants some sort of equivalent to the Swedish Torekov monarchy. It seems he wants to do away with the regal powers with the next change of throne. That's roughly what happened in Sweden as well.

Dr. Giebels really makes the statement of the day when he supposedly says:

With a ceremonial monarchy, there's also no further need for government ministers to be responsible for what the monarch says and does. It's then up to them [the royal family] to know what is and isn't acceptable.

Oh really?!? Now, historians are supposed to know a bit about history, aren't they? Especially about the history they're commenting on. That also goes for very recent history, right? The King of Sweden has no constitutional role except for ceremonial duties, the most important of which arguably are the duty to sign and receive letters of accreditation of envoys and duties in connection with the opening of the Riksdag.

In spite of all of this, there was an uproar about statements just over 3 years ago. Do we seriously believe that a purely ceremonial Dutch monarch can say anything without politicians running to the megaphones with their complaints?

Those who run around complaining about monarchy being undemocratic won't be satisfied until every single remaining dust particle of it has been wiped into museums.

It's peculiar how one can say that it's undemocratic. It's like the waving of a magic wand. No additional arguments are needed. All the wisdom of philosophers through centuries about the vices of democracy be damned.