hi dando,
i think it comes back to a contrasting idea of society.
americans have ideals of what they think a society should be and how individuals relate to it which is their own.
it has written these things down. in particular it is enshrined in the declaration of independence. americans think it is a self-evident truth that all men are created equal.
a worthy ideal. but a lousy observation. practically-speaking, we are born unequal. some folks are endowed with greater abilities. some with more money. etc. one person comes to law with a legal dream team. another has an overworked public defender. some folks have access to better medicine and education than others. some folks are luckier than others. there is no way to make strict equality happen however much you want it.
indeed, is there a western society that is more unequal than the usa?
while america proclaims its dream, the reality is that it has less social fluidity than many countries. some of the more fluid societies have monarchies!
so monarchy doesn't seem to stop social fluidity.
i think perhaps we need to be practical about reality. you can't remove inequality from it. you can only seek to manage it. it isn't a bad thing to aspire for more equality. but to some degree, it is worth accepting it and stopping it from getting out of control.
the nice things about modern constitutional monarchies:
1. their power is corralled. in the uk, the government runs the country. the queen offers advice and signs bills into law. so the monarchy provides a kind of polite check on democracy.
2. and yet the armed forces pledge their allegiance to the crown and not the government. so if we ever voted in a megalomaniac, he cannot use the army to do his bidding. he must use the governmental machinery to act. i daresay if there was a showdown over control of the military, the pm would lose it.
3. a monarchy unifies the country in ways that politicians cannot. think how divisive the american presidents are for americans. and then consider how people who maintain a monarchy can celebrate a birth together, feel a sense of continuity in their history etc. this is precisely because the sovereign operates outside the democratic system. and because she is not subject to democratic influences (eg money, popularity) she is free to act according to other values or to follow the advice of her privy council (ex pms etc).
4. and yet the sovereign is subject to law. if she were to commit a crime, she would have to appear in court. and in those circumstances, she would be forced to abdicate.
5. it's a job no one envies. the most boring job of all. they do it diligently because they have a sense of duty. their whole lives are set up to provide service to everyone else. that sets an example to everyone to accept their lives and do the best they can. it doesn't stop anyone from succeeding. indeed, it changes the meaning of success.
6. any person may become the spouse of the monarch. so there's a lottery opportunity to become majestic that is open to everyone. our kate won that race in this generation. so the next heir is half common. which is awesome.
7. it stops money from being the only measure of success. people are honoured by the crown for all sorts of good works. donald trump may be wealthy. he would most likely not earn himself a knighthood.
8. a constitutional monarchy creates stability and continuity while also permitting change. unlike a piece of paper, a monarch can capture the past without making society subject to it. indeed, she acts as the bridge between the past and the present.
9. one way to view a modern constitutional monarchy is that it performs a kind of trust role alongside a democracy. like a sophisticated sort of auditor, who quietly guarantees the integrity of the structures and operations of government.
10. another is to provide some sort of human figure to which to attach one's loyalty. rather than a flag, say. or pride in a bottle of cola.
11. although weirdly enough, monarchies are good for business. a tremendous amount of tourism and royal junk props up the uk economy. i even bought some overpriced royal shortbread biscuits when going through customs one time.
12. the monarchical structure tends to fix certain kinds of issues that a simple democratic one finds difficult. when done well, the monarchy provides an institution that nearly everyone can buy into and helps them feel they belong. which provides some kind of bulwark against the extremes which every society has to face down. rather an institutional mosque of england than islamic extremism etc. but since some extremists are inevitable, the monarchy structures a kind of stability around traditional values and provides the root out of which decent, law-abiding civic values can grow. this also isolates the small number of bad actors.
the choice is that or a piece of old paper with some arguable ideas enumerated upon it.
some educated people choose the latter. some choose the former.
for myself, i kinda like the idea of having a monarch. every now and then there's a wild one. but we have regencies and abdications to control those problems. no one has ever asked me to bow and scrape. but i daresay i would if the time came.
| 