Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Yes, of course it's ridiculous

Writing about it, minutes after the announcement that there is a new heir to the English throne, it is enough to make a republican of you. Unless, of course, you give it some thought. 

What are the alternatives. The rule of plutocrats? Such as seems to be a current product of democratic processes? When elections are just bought, subtly or not?  TV stars setting taste and opinion? That's better? Thugopolies, like Russia has? 

Only the young disregard the benefits of political stability, an easy argument to make for monarchy. But there is more. The people born into that status do not seem to be particularly handsome, or beautiful. Certainly they are not terribly bright. What they do have are standards. Standards of fairness, standards of taste, and the ability to convey their own fairness as plausible. 

Their own sense of entitlement is not as defensive as that of the bankers. They can, sincerely believing themselves superior, make decisions based on a larger good  Their sense of entitlement is genetic, and they may lack that grasping defensiveness characteristic of modern psychology.

Compared to a typical politician, the aristocrat has nothing to hide. One speaks in generalities of course. And of course we are not talking about the monarchy you read about in history. We are talking about constitutional ones, and their value. 

There are not many left, and it is reasonable to wonder if that tyke will ever make it to a throne. 
Because once gone, monarchies cannot be replaced. There is this hope though: the function of the monarch, that is to say, to wave at you, yes, you personally, is not a need that is going away. One shudders to think what is replacing them.