In 1629, frustrated by the unwillingness of Parliament to grant him taxation power, King Charles I of England dissolved the body and had nine members arrested. He did not recall Parliament for over a decade. The intervening period, known as Personal Rule, saw Charles I govern as a de facto dictator, with only a body of councilors to advise him. In 1640, forced by military necessity from Scotland, Charles I recalled Parliament in order to raise money to pay the military; shortly thereafter, stymied by Parliament, he dissolved the body again. But necessity encroached once again, and Charles I finally recalled Parliament. This would be the beginning of the end of his monarchy: the Long Parliament, as it would later be called, directly opposed many of Charles I’s initiatives, and that opposition would devolve into the English Civil War — a war that ended with Charles I’s execution.

All of this should serve as a brief reminder that when a chief executive ignores checks and balances, he may maximize his authority temporarily. But after a while, the royal saddle tends to chafe.

We are now approaching an inflection point in the United States: Do we want an elective monarchy, or not? A great many Americans seem perfectly comfortable with such a system, so long as the president is of their party. Today, the president of the United States is elected once every four years; he mouths platitudes about respect for norms and institutions; and then he proceeds to do what he wants, using the authority of the administrative state as his scepter. The legislature has become a vestigial organ, delegated only the power to fund enormous omnibus packages. True rule-making authority lies with the chief executive.

Thus, former President Barack Obama declared more than 20 times that he did not have the authority to unilaterally suspend elements of immigration law. That did not stop him from doing just that with the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. President Joe Biden recently declared he had no power to extend an eviction moratorium via the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That did not stop him from pursuing precisely that policy. Biden and his administration stated repeatedly that they did not have the power to unilaterally mandate COVID-19 vaccination. That power was to be exercised by the individual states. That did not stop Biden from mobilizing the vague grant of power under the Occupational Safety and Health Act to dictate that every business with more than 100 employees had to test its unvaccinated employees once per week, or vaccinate them, or fire them, or pay $14,000 per violation.

There are only two institutions standing in the way of full-fledged presidential monarchy: the courts and the states. Biden has pledged to override the states: “If these governors won’t help us beat the pandemic, I’ll use my power as president to get them out of the way.” And while Biden has pledged not to stack the courts, his prior institutional pledges have lasted only as long as his power remains unchallenged; he repeatedly suggested he would not seek to destroy the filibuster but has now apparently flipped on that subject.

The problem with elective monarchy is that it destroys the feedback mechanisms that help balance a pluralistic, decentralized society. Charles I could reign under the precepts of Personal Rule just so long as his impositions were moderate and his foreign policy peaceful. The minute serious complications arose, Personal Rule began to collapse.

The same will hold true in the United States. Charles I had the authority of kingship, but not consolidated compulsory control. That made his dictatorship unstable. The lesson for us is simple: We may want change, and we may want to carve a path through the checks and balances that obstruct that change by granting near-total power to an elective monarch. But unity won’t follow. Chaos will.

creators.com

I despise modern European monarchies. Words cannot put to screen just how repulsive this 21st century aristocracy is to me personally. At first, one would think that this opinion comes from the fact that I am American, you know whole Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution and that 1776 thing. But that is simply not the case, when it comes to hereditary monarchies my big ideological problem comes from the “hereditary” part, not so much the “monarchy” part. My hatred for today’s impotent Euro figurehead is derived from watching them waste their massive potential on a daily basis. Every remaining noble could be a force to build a better Europe, but ultimately they do nothing at all with their lives, content to sit and stare as the last embers of their relevance are stuffed out forever. But, to my surprise at least, Prince Charles may have finally started to wake up to this fact after decades of mental slumber.

Recently, the Prince of Wales decided to do something absolutely unthinkable for a 21st century noble – actually attempt to try to lead their people for the betterment of their own society. Farming in the U.K. in 2020 is having some difficulties. The Coronavirus Pandemic has shut down borders, meaning that being able to use hordes of people from destitute nations to fill the function in society that serfdom did, is temporarily not an option. This means that for the British, there will be no farm hands coming from the loser nations of the EU to work for a shilling a day. And so in this context Prince Charles took it upon himself to be the face of the “#PickForBritain” campaign which is designed to get local average Brits to go out into the fields and give a helping for the good of the stomach of the nation. Despite the fact that the promotion of this project was not handled very well and that it will probably fail, it stands out as a very rare attempt from a member of the European nobility to look relevant to the masses and actually do something, anything other than smiling and waving to crowds.

Some may argue that this plan actually makes royalty look even more out of touch because Prince Charles’s plan purposely invoked the idea of the Land Army that came together to save the U.K. from starvation with all the boys being busy across the Channel. For someone from the WWII generation this was probably very memorable and the get the reference, but for someone who is 18 years old now, who can pick more veg than someone in their 80’s, they probably only have loose idea as to what he is referring to. Although the PickForBritain website makes this very clear, the raging bloggers and media outlets angry at Prince Charles, fail to mention that this farm work is actually going to be paid for in accordance with the British minimum wage. So unlike the spirit of the promotion #PickForBritain is not a volunteer project, instead it is more like an explosion of minimum wage jobs that need to be filled thanks to some promotion by A-lister, which is, to be honest, a much easier sell to the population.

Additionally, rather than showing himself leading by example (and working for minimum wage the first and only time in his life) the Prince of Wales presents himself in promotional material wearing clean clothing asking others to step up and put in all the effort. When you call on the nation to take action you should probably do at least some leadership by example. This seems like an obvious flaw in the promotion that should have been caught in advance. The PR side of this idea seems to have been a total failure which is shocking given the British Royal Family’s resources to hire a top notch firm.

Yes, as stated above this could have been handled better. As a man in his 60’s we shouldn’t expect Prince Charles to be walking with 100lbs. sacks of potatoes on his shoulders, but he could have pledged to put in X hours of work Y days per week as an example. He could have also gotten some lesser nobles (still young men of privilege) to make a guest appearance doing the more dirty brutal work that we associate with farming at least on camera. Furthermore, we live in a time where community is dead and the majority of us are urban dwellers who do not know their neighbors, expecting the British to rise up and act like their ancestors to work the fields for Her Majesty, who were born into a different cultural universe than we live in today is naive to say the least.

But the key thing is, and the reason that I chose to write about this is, that pigs have finally flown and a European noble actually tried to do something for his society with his position appealing to people to rise up and take action. This isn’t Princess Diana whining for money to clear landmines in far off nations, but the future King of England trying to rally the masses to resolve a real domestic problem and Europe is certainly facing many challenges in this 21st century that could require some “rallying”.

The remaining nobility has it in their own self interests to restore their relevance, if not their direct political power. If Europeans with the right genetic luck were to get the proper PR and strategy behind public moves like #PickForBritain then they could quickly restore the meaning behind their positions which may save their skins in the long run. Figureheads look like a waste of taxpayer money and invoke jealousy/anger from the population who dreams of doing nothing and getting paid for it. The question of doing away with the nobility becomes more and more relevant every year because the nobility keeps allowing itself to become less relevant.

As long as Prince Charles, or any other member of the aristocracy can convince the Heartland of their nation that he is “their guy” then the relics of the past will remain on the pound note, keep their castles and be protected as a symbol of the state. In an increasingly atheistic and individualist Europe why should the monarchies get anything at all from taxpayers? This is probably why Charles has started to make appeals to the suffering of Christians worldwide. For if there is no God, then there is no Divine Right for him to rule by when his mother passes. Monarchs are a symbol of a European Right Wing Christian outlook on life and they really need to play to prop up their base before it vanishes into history along with them.

Too often even the Alternative Media is too apt to jump on anything they don’t like. Yes Charles’s plan for Britons to rise up and pick beets was badly managed, but the overall strategy was right. An irrelevant monarchy ends, a relevant one will continue (unless murdered by revolutionaries) and in the long run this flawed but improvable PR move should be taken as a wakeup call to monarchs across Europe.

In summation…

If nobility does not demonstrate relevance it will be phased out.

It is the people in the Heartland of a nation who willing to support the monarchs most so they need to be appealed to first.

European monarchy rests on Christianity which they have let die out and need to revitalize.

Generally it is the European Right that sees value in monarchy the nobles must also revitalize this segment of the population. It is their base.

Nobles need to create action in their countries for their own subjects not cry crocodile tears for Africa. A British monarch may only weep for Britain.

Badly framing the idea of #PickForBritain as volunteer work, when it is actually paid work, is what is killing the idea. This project could yet be a success proving that migrant labor is not really needed.

Perhaps some nobles may have been trying PR moves that I am not aware of but successful PR by billionaires gets attention.

Any attempts to show relevance for the sake of-self preservation are worth it for those like Prince Charles. They still have a few decades before the sun finally sets on the British Empire.

Europe’s postmodern monarchs simply have the resources to do everything and yet they (seemingly) do nothing, absolutely nothing, when the foundation of their wealth relies on them being relevant. As long as some government project can convince its financiers that it is needed, even if it is completely worthless, so it can continue to waste money providing some dubious social service. In a way Europe’s monarchies have become like one of these social programs/charities yet they almost never do anything to try to convince the public that they deserve their manors and titles. Feminist organizations are still screaming that women are horribly oppressed so they can get that sexy grant money. D.A.R.E. continues to exist decades after proving that it does nothing to prevent drug use in America but they sure know how to beg to keep that financing coming. Europe’s decrepid nobility doesn’t seem to get this fact.