The Monarchist 1.0
Defending the British Crown Commonwealth and the English-Speaking Peoples
[+] HONOURING OUR PATRON, SIR WINSTON CHURCHILL, VICTOR OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES
[+] HONOURING OUR QUEEN, ELIZABETH THE SECOND, ON THE 80TH YEAR OF HER BIRTH (1926 - 2006)
[+] HONOURING OUR KING, SAINT EDWARD THE CONFESSOR, ON THE 1000TH YEAR OF HIS BIRTH (1005 - 2005)
[+] HONOURING OUR HERO, LORD NELSON, ON THE BICENTENNIAL OF THE BATTLE OF TRAFALGAR (1805 - 2005)
[+] HONOURING OUR SONS, THE QUEEN'S COMMONWEALTH SOLDIERS KILLED IN THE 'WAR ON TERROR'
Chief Warrant Officer Robert Girouard, 46, Royal Canadian Regiment, Nov 27, 2006 (Afstan)
Staff Sergeant Sharron Elliott, 34, Intelligence Corps, Nov 12, 2006 (Iraq)
Private Jacob B. Kovco, 25, Royal Australian Regiment, April 21, 2006
[+] HONOURING OUR VETS ON THE 150TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE VICTORIA CROSS (1856 - 2006)
Monday, November 07, 2005
Monarchy is not about the Royals, it's about us
It seems I might be in for a pasting from some of my Commonwealth friends because I had the temerity to criticize Prince Charles, our future king. Perhaps they disagree with the criticism. Or perhaps they agree with it, but feel that such criticism should never be countenanced, or at least publicly uttered, since to do so is fundamentally an act of disloyalty. Perhaps they believe that to publicly disapprove of a Royal’s position/behaviour on a matter of concern is a mark of disrespect that undermines monarchy. I don’t know about that. I disagree.
What I do know is that monarchy damages itself when it does one of two things: when the Crown makes its views known on a politically divisive issue (this is not to be confused with moral issues, since I do believe there is a role for the Crown on providing moral leadership), or when a Royal acts in an undignified manner that brings embarrassment to the institution. This is especially true for monarchy since unlike the political class, its virtue and strength—indeed very survival—depends critically on preserving its intrinsic dignity.
That’s what monarchy is about. In a world lacking in dignity, the monarchy represents it. It represents the dignity of ordinary people, of the ordinary person. Monarchy is not above the people, it is the people. The Queen is just an ordinary person. That’s its genius. Unlike every other profession, Her Majesty did not arrive there through ambition, by being better than the people, by politically maneuvering above us. She got there simply because she was one of us—she was born.
Therein lies the irony of monarchy, that its luminosity and radiance comes from its very ordinariness. When Royals venture away from this ordinary quality into the me-world of celebrities and promoters (i.e., the late Princess of Wales or the former Duchess of York), it loses its lustre and dignity. It denigrates their purpose for the Royals have essentially one crucial task at hand: To attempt to the best of their ability to represent the dignity of ordinary people, of the ordinary person. And when they fail to do this, when they fail to uphold our dignity, we should voice our displeasure accordingly.
POSTED BY: The Monarchist AT 6:36 p.m. | LINKS |
It seems I might be in for a pasting from some of my Commonwealth friends because I had the temerity to criticize Prince Charles, our future king. Perhaps they disagree with the criticism. Or perhaps they agree with it, but feel that such criticism should never be countenanced, or at least publicly uttered, since to do so is fundamentally an act of disloyalty. Perhaps they believe that to publicly disapprove of a Royal’s position/behaviour on a matter of concern is a mark of disrespect that undermines monarchy. I don’t know about that. I disagree.
What I do know is that monarchy damages itself when it does one of two things: when the Crown makes its views known on a politically divisive issue (this is not to be confused with moral issues, since I do believe there is a role for the Crown on providing moral leadership), or when a Royal acts in an undignified manner that brings embarrassment to the institution. This is especially true for monarchy since unlike the political class, its virtue and strength—indeed very survival—depends critically on preserving its intrinsic dignity.
That’s what monarchy is about. In a world lacking in dignity, the monarchy represents it. It represents the dignity of ordinary people, of the ordinary person. Monarchy is not above the people, it is the people. The Queen is just an ordinary person. That’s its genius. Unlike every other profession, Her Majesty did not arrive there through ambition, by being better than the people, by politically maneuvering above us. She got there simply because she was one of us—she was born.
Therein lies the irony of monarchy, that its luminosity and radiance comes from its very ordinariness. When Royals venture away from this ordinary quality into the me-world of celebrities and promoters (i.e., the late Princess of Wales or the former Duchess of York), it loses its lustre and dignity. It denigrates their purpose for the Royals have essentially one crucial task at hand: To attempt to the best of their ability to represent the dignity of ordinary people, of the ordinary person. And when they fail to do this, when they fail to uphold our dignity, we should voice our displeasure accordingly.
POSTED BY: The Monarchist AT 6:36 p.m. | LINKS |
Comments:
Can't see the comments?If you are unable to see the comments, your browser may have javascript turned off or may not support javascript. Check your security settings. Otherwise you can click here to access to comments in regular HTML from the TheirSay! Comment Server.
.gif){kind=small}
.gif){kind=small}
