monarchy vs republic

After the first great war, the lesson of history had at last been learnt -- hereditary and interbreeding royal families in control of nations are a liability rather than an asset -- but the process of electing national rulers by ballot is fraught with similar dangers.

Up until last century, ruling families were 'royal families' who played a major role in international affairs by making strategic alliances by marriage. These days, ruling families tend to be neither 'royal' nor interested in marrying off their children to titled royals, but they do tend to be dynastic -- ensuring that their children inherit wealth, power and glory -- and this will inevitably lead to marriages of convenience and the same sort of 'entitlement' mentality that the old royal familes once held.

Constitutional monarchies do act to tone down this dynastic tendency in political families, but in republics -- especially large ones like the USA -- there is already evidence that certain families believe they have a divine right to the White House.

Also, there is the danger in electing a leader whose real interests are not in line with the nation he or she respresents. One might argue that hereditary monarchies are fraught with this sort of danger, too. After all, the British royal family was no more English than the Ptolemies were Egyptian. 

Cleopatra and her Ptolemaic ancestors were Macedonian (Greek) but she stood out in history as the only one in her family who deigned to learn the language of the nation she ruled. Bearing in mind that German was the official language at the British court until the embarrassment of war with Germany caused a change of language to English and a hasty royal name change to Windsor, there were very good reasons at the time to suspect that the royal family's interests did not lie with England.

With the rise of multiculturalism there is the risk, too, that an elected leader of a different ethnic or cultural background may lead to a foreign nation influencing our policies. Sure, in democratic countries we have the option to vote undesirable leaders out of office, but how secure are the ballots?

The prospect of gaining an unpopular monarch -- even a constitutional one -- is a problem that the British have had to wrestle with since the execution of Charles I in 1649 and will doubtless wrestle with vigorously when the current Queen Elizabeth II passes on. Will the British opt to depose their royal family in favor of a republic? Will they put up with Charles and Camilla? Or will they skip a generation and embrace the popular young Prince William as their next constitutional monarch?