Monarchism is the advocacy of the system of monarchy or monarchical rule.[1] A monarchist is an individual who supports this form of government independently of any specific monarch, whereas one who supports a particular monarch is a royalist. Conversely, the opposition to monarchical rule is referred to as republicanism.[2][3][4]
Monarchical rule is among the oldest political institutions.[5] The similar form of societal hierarchy known as chiefdom or tribal kingship is prehistoric. Chiefdoms provided the concept of state formation, which started with civilizations such as Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt and the Indus Valley civilization.[6] In some parts of the world, chiefdoms became monarchies.[7]
In the 17th and 18th centuries the Enlightenment began.[8] This resulted in new anti-monarchist ideas[9] which resulted in several revolutions such as the 18th century American Revolution and the French Revolution which were both additional steps in the weakening of power of European monarchies.
For most of its history, China was organized into various dynastic states under the rule of hereditary monarchs. Beginning with the establishment of dynastic rule by Yu the Great c.2070 BC, and ending with the abdication of the Xuantong Emperor in AD 1912, Chinese historiography came to organize itself around the succession of monarchical dynasties.[a][b] Besides those established by the dominant Han ethnic group or its spiritual Huaxia predecessors, dynasties throughout Chinese history were also founded by non-Han peoples.[16]
Following the collapse of Austria-Hungary, the Republic of German-Austria was proclaimed. The Constitutional Assembly of German Austria passed the Habsburg Law, which permanently exiled the Habsburg family from Austria. Despite this, significant support for the Habsburg family persisted in Austria. Following the Anschluss of 1938, the Nazi government suppressed monarchist activities. By the time Nazi rule ended in Austria, support for monarchism had largely evaporated.[27]
In 1920s Germany, a number of monarchists gathered around the German National People's Party (founded in 1918), which demanded the return of the Hohenzollern monarchy and an end to the Weimar Republic; the party retained a large base of support until the rise of Nazism in the 1930s, as Adolf Hitler staunchly opposed monarchism.[30]
Italy
The aftermath of World War II saw the return of monarchist/republican rivalry in Italy, where a referendum was held on whether the state should remain a monarchy or become a republic. The republican side won the vote by a narrow margin, and the modern Republic of Italy was created.[31]
In England, royalty ceded power to other groups in a gradual process. In 1215, a group of nobles forced King John to sign Magna Carta, which guaranteed the English barons certain liberties and established that the king's powers were not absolute. King Charles I was executed in 1649, and the Commonwealth of England was established as a republic. Highly unpopular, the republic was ended in 1660, and the monarchy was restored under King Charles II. In 1687–88, the Glorious Revolution and the overthrow of King James II established the principles of constitutional monarchy, which would later be worked out by Locke and other thinkers. However, absolute monarchy, justified by Hobbes in Leviathan (1651), remained a prominent principle elsewhere.
Following the Glorious Revolution, William III and Mary II were established as constitutional monarchs, with less power than their predecessor James II. Since then, royal power has become more ceremonial, with powers such as refusal to assent last exercised in 1708 by Queen Anne. Once part of the United Kingdom (1801–1922), southern Ireland rejected monarchy and became the Republic of Ireland in 1949. Support for a ceremonial monarchy remains high in Britain: Queen Elizabeth II (r.1952–2022), possessed wide support from the U.K.'s population.
North America
Costa Rica
The struggle between monarchists and republicans led to the Costa Rican civil war of 1823. Costa Rican monarchists include Joaquín de Oreamuno y Muñoz de la Trinidad, José Santos Lombardo y Alvarado, and José Rafael Gallegos Alvarado. in 1822, Costa Rican monarchists were loyal to Emperor Agustín de Iturbide of the First Mexican Empire.[33]
Old colonial coat of arms of Honduras with monarchical elements
Honduras
After the independence of the general captaincy of Guatemala from the Spanish empire, Honduras joined the First Mexican Empire for a brief period. These were divided between the annexationists, made up mostly of illustrious Spanish-descendant families and members of the conservative party who supported the idea of being part of an empire, and the liberals who wanted Central America to be a separate nation under a republican system.
Emperor Iturbide of México
Mexico
After obtaining independence from Spain, the First Mexican Empire was established under Emperor Agustín I. His reign lasted less than one year, and he was forcefully deposed. In 1864, the Second Mexican Empire was formed under Emperor Maximilian I. Maximilian's government enjoyed French aid, but opposition from America, and collapsed after three years. Much like Agustín I, Maximilian I was deposed and later executed by his republican enemies. Since 1867, Mexico has not possessed a monarchy.
Today, some Mexican monarchist organizations advocate for Maximilian von Götzen-Iturbide or Carlos Felipe de Habsburgo to be instated as the Emperor of Mexico.
Nicaragua
The miskito ethnic group inhabits part of the Atlantic coast of Honduras and Nicaragua, by the beginning of the 17th century the said ethnic group was reorganized under a single chief known as Ta Uplika, for the reign of his grandson King Oldman I this group had a very close relationship With the English, they managed to turn the Mosquitia coast into an English protectorate that would decline in the 19th century until it completely disappeared in 1894 with the abdication of Robert II.[34]
Currently, the Miskitos who are shot between the two countries have denounced the neglect of their communities and abuses committed by the authorities. As a result of this, in Nicaragua several Miskito people began a movement of separatism from present-day Nicaragua and a re-institution of the monarchy.
After the U.S. declared its independence, the form of government by which it would operate still remained unsettled. At least two of America's Founding Fathers, Alexander Hamilton and Nathaniel Gorham, believed that America should be an independent monarchy. Various proposals to create an American monarchy were considered, including the Prussian scheme which would have made Prince Henry of Prussia king of the United States. Hamilton proposed that the leader of America should be an elected monarch, while Gorham pushed for a hereditary monarchy.[35][36] U.S. military officer Lewis Nicola also desired for America to be a monarchy, suggesting George Washington accept the crown of America, which he declined. All attempts ultimately failed, and America was founded a Republic.
Since the ratification of the constitution, support for monarchy has possessed a generally low popularity, though it has increased slightly over time. In 1950, 3% of Americans said it would be a good idea for America to possess a royal family, while 93% thought it would be bad. This question was re-asked in 1999, where 11% of Americans answered that in favor of a royal family would be good for the United States and 87% against.[37] A 2013 CNN poll found that 13% of Americans would be open to the United States possessing a royal family again.[38] A 2018 poll asking if America would be better or worse if it possessed a constitutional monarchy had 11% of Americans answering better and 36% answering worse.[39] A 2021 poll by YouGov found that 5% of Americans would consider it a good thing for the United States to have a monarchy (7% support among men and 4% support among women), with 69% answering that it would be a bad thing. In the YouGov poll, African Americans were most likely to answer positively in favor of a monarchy at 10% support.[40] In 2023 another poll was conducted which found 12% of Americans favored monarchy in the United States while 63% remained opposed.[41]
From gaining its independence in 1822 until 1889, Brazil was governed as a constitutional monarchy with a branch of the Portuguese Royal Family serving as monarchs. Prior to this period, Brazil had been a royal colony which had also served briefly as the seat of government for the Portuguese Empire following the occupation of that country by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1808. The history of the Empire of Brazil was marked by brief periods of political instability, several wars that Brazil won, and a marked increase in immigration which saw the arrival of both Jews and Protestants who were attracted by Brazil's reputation for religious tolerance. The final decades of the Empire under the reign of Pedro II saw a remarkable period of relative peace both at home and internationally, coupled with dramatic economic expansion, the extension of basic civil rights to most people and the gradual restriction of slavery, culminating in its final abolition in 1888. It is also remembered for its thriving culture and arts. However, Pedro II had little interest in preserving the monarchy and passively accepted its overthrow by a military coup d'état in 1889 resulting in the establishment of a dictatorship known as the First Brazilian Republic.[42]
The majority of current monarchies are constitutional monarchies. In a constitutional monarchy the power of the monarch is restricted by either a written or unwritten constitution, this should not be confused with a ceremonial monarchy, in which the monarch holds only symbolic power and plays very little to no part in government or politics. In some constitutional monarchies the monarch does play a more active role in political affairs than in others. In Thailand, for instance, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who reigned from 1946 to 2016, played a critical role in the nation's political agenda and in various military coups. Similarly, in Morocco, King Mohammed VI wields significant, but not absolute power.
Liechtenstein is a democratic principality whose citizens have voluntarily given more power to their monarch in recent years.
British political scientist Vernon Bogdanor justifies monarchy on the grounds that it provides for a nonpartisan head of state, separate from the head of government, and thus ensures that the highest representative of the country, at home and internationally, does not represent a particular political party, but all people.[45] Bogdanor also notes that monarchies can play a helpful unifying role in a multinational state, noting that "In Belgium, it is sometimes said that the king is the only Belgian, everyone else being either Fleming or Walloon" and that the British sovereign can belong to all of the United Kingdom's constituent countries (England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland), without belonging to any particular one of them.[45]
Private interest
Thomas Hobbes wrote that the private interest of the monarchy is the same with the public. The riches, power, and humour of a monarch arise only from the riches, strength, and reputation of his subjects. An elected Head of State is incentivised to increase his own wealth for leaving office after a few years whereas a monarch has no reason to corrupt because he would be cheating himself.[d]
Wise counsel
Thomas Hobbes wrote that a monarch can receive wise counsel with secrecy while an assembly cannot. Advisors to the assembly tend to be well-versed more in the acquisition of their own wealth than of knowledge; are likely to give their advices in long discourses which often excite men into action but do not govern them in it, moved by the flame of passion instead of enlightenment. Their multitude is a weakness.[e]
Long termism
Thomas Hobbes wrote that the resolutions of a monarch are subject to no inconsistency save for human nature; in assemblies, inconsistencies arise from the number. For in an assembly, as little as the absence of a few or the diligent appearance of a few of the contrary opinion, "undoes today all that was done yesterday".[f]
Civil war reduction
Thomas Hobbes wrote that a monarch cannot disagree with himself, out of envy or interest, but an assembly may and to such a height that may produce a civil war.[g]
Liberty
The International Monarchist League, founded in 1943, has always sought to promote monarchy on the grounds that it strengthens popular liberty, both in a democracy and in a dictatorship, because by definition the monarch is not beholden to politicians.
British-American libertarian writer Matthew Feeney argues that European constitutional monarchies "have managed for the most part to avoid extreme politics"—specifically fascism, communism, and military dictatorship—"in part because monarchies provide a check on the wills of populist politicians" by representing entrenched customs and traditions.[46] Feeny notes that
European monarchies—such as the Danish, Belgian, Swedish, Dutch, Norwegian, and British—have ruled over countries that are among the most stable, prosperous, and free in the world.[46]
Socialist writer George Orwell argued a similar point, that constitutional monarchy is effective at preventing the development of fascism.
"The function of the King in promoting stability and acting as a sort of keystone in a non-democratic society is, of course, obvious. But he also has, or can have, the function of acting as an escape-valve for dangerous emotions. A French journalist said to me once that the monarchy was one of the things that have saved Britain from Fascism...It is at any rate possible that while this division of function exists a Hitler or a Stalin cannot come to power. On the whole the European countries which have most successfully avoided Fascism have been constitutional monarchies... I have often advocated that a Labour government, i.e. one that meant business, would abolish titles while retaining the Royal Family.’[47]
Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn took a different approach, arguing that liberty and equality are contradictions. As such, he argued that attempts to establish greater social equality through the abolishment of monarchy, ultimately results in a greater loss of liberty for citizens. He believed that equality can only be accomplished through the suppression of liberty, as humans are naturally unequal and hierarchical. Kuehnelt-Leddihn also believed that people are on average freer under monarchies than they are under democratic republics, as the latter tends to more easily become tyrannical through ochlocracy. In Liberty or Equality, he writes:
There is little doubt that the American Congress or the French Chambers have a power over their nations which would rouse the envy of a Louis XIV or a George III, were they alive today. Not only prohibition, but also the income tax declaration, selective service, obligatory schooling, the fingerprinting of blameless citizens, premarital blood tests—none of these totalitarian measures would even the royal absolutism of the seventeenth century have dared to introduce.[48]
Hans-Hermann Hoppe also argues that monarchy helps to preserve individual liberty more effectively than democracy.[49]
In a 1943 essay in The Spectator, "Equality", British author C.S. Lewis criticized egalitarianism, and its corresponding call for the abolition of monarchy, as contrary to human nature, writing,
A man's reaction to Monarchy is a kind of test. Monarchy can easily be 'debunked'; but watch the faces, mark well the accents, of the debunkers. These are the men whose tap-root in Eden has been cut: whom no rumour of the polyphony, the dance, can reach—men to whom pebbles laid in a row are more beautiful than an arch...Where men are forbidden to honour a king they honour millionaires, athletes, or film-stars instead: even famous prostitutes or gangsters. For spiritual nature, like bodily nature, will be served; deny it food and it will gobble poison.[50]
Political accountability
Oxford political scientists Petra Schleiter and Edward Morgan-Jones wrote that in monarchies, it is more common to hold elections than non-electoral replacements.[51]
Notable works
Notable works arguing in favor of monarchy include
Abbott, Tony (1995). The Minimal Monarchy: And Why It Still Makes Sense For Australia
This is a dynamic list and may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness. You can help by editing the page to add missing items, with references to reliable sources.
This section's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. The reason given is: Some information in this section is more than 10 years old. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.(November 2022)
1 2 3 4 Figures for Austria is the average percentage of supporters from several opinion polls taken prior to November 2018; as reported by EFE.
↑ Among respondents, 22 per cent answered that they were not opposed to a monarchy in principle, but could not think of a person "worthy of the Russian throne", whereas 6 per cent believed there was.
↑ Some activists within the sovereignty movement advocate for a restoration of the Hawaiian monarchy, while others push for an independent Hawaiian Republic.
↑ While the Xia dynasty is typically considered to be the first orthodox Chinese dynasty, numerous sources including the Book of Documents mention two other dynasties that preceded the Xia: the "Tang" (唐) and the "Yu" (虞) dynasties.[11][12][13][14] The former is sometimes called the "Ancient Tang" (古唐) to distinguish it from other dynasties named "Tang".[15] Should the historicity of these earlier dynasties be attested, Yu the Great would not have been the initiator of dynastic rule in China.
↑ All attempts at restoring monarchical and dynastic rule in China following the Xinhai Revolution ended in failure. Hence, the abdication of the Xuantong Emperor in AD 1912 is typically regarded as the formal end of the Chinese monarchy.
↑ In English, the use of the term Mikado (帝／御門) for the emperor was once common but is now considered obsolete.[18]
↑ The Figaro poll showed that 38% of French respondents said monarchy makes them dream. In addition, 55% believe that monarchy is not adapted to today’s society, while on the contrary 44% judge it to be timeless and still adapted to today’s society.
↑ Whilst the percentage of people who supported the return of the Prussian monarchy was 8%. However, 14 percent were in favour, and among “right-wing voters”, 15 percent supported the idea of a royal family in general.
↑ According to the survey, 14% supported the Monarchy and 57% were against it. 29% were unsure on the matter.
↑ 37% of people who responded to the survey claimed Portugal would be worse as a Monarchy, 19.7% thought it would be better than the Republic and 43.3% were indifferent to it.
↑ 54.7% of Romanians say they would vote against the monarchy and for maintaining the republic (compared to 41% in July 2013). 35.4% say they would vote in favor of the monarchy (compared to 27.2% in July 2013), and 9.9% do not know or do not answer (compared to 31.8% in July 2013).
↑ "Definition of Republic". Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved 2017-02-18. a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch ... a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law
↑ "The definition of republic". Dictionary.com. Retrieved 2017-02-18. a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them. ... a state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state.
↑ "Tennō". Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved 12 August 2021.
↑ Kanʼichi Asakawa. The early institutional life of Japan: a study in the reform of 645 A.D.. Tokyo: Shueisha (1903), p. 25. "We purposely avoid, in spite of its wide usage in foreign literature, the misleading term Mikado. If it be not for the natural curiosity of the races, which always seeks something novel and loves to call foreign things by foreign names, it is hard to understand why this obsolete and ambiguous word should so sedulously be retained. It originally meant not only the Sovereign, but also his house, the court, and even the State, and its use in historical writings causes many difficulties which it is unnecessary to discuss here in detail. The native Japanese employ the term neither in speech nor in writing. It might as well be dismissed with great advantage from sober literature as it has been for the official documents."
↑ Hoye, Timothy. (1999). Japanese Politics: Fixed and Floating Worlds, p. 78; "According to legend, the first Japanese emperor was Jinmu. Along with the next 13 emperors, Jimmu is not considered an actual, historical figure. Historically verifiable Emperors of Japan date from the early sixth century with Kinmei."
↑ Asmuss, Burkhard (27 January 2023). "Die Deutschnationale Volkspartei (DNVP)"[German National People's Party (DNVP)]. Deutsches Historisches Museum (in German). Retrieved 30 May 2023.
↑ Casanova, Julián (29 July 2010) [2007]. The Spanish Republic and Civil War. Translated by Douch, Martin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (published 2010). p.1. ISBN9781139490573. Retrieved 10 September 2022. [...] the local elections of 12 April [...] turned into a plebiscite between Monarchy and republicanism. It was soon clear that the republicans had won in most of the provincial capitals. [...] Alfonso XIII abdicated, and a good many cities and towns proclaimed the Republic on 14 April 1931.
↑ Otto von Habsburg "Monarchy or Republic?". ("Excerpted from The Conservative Tradition in European Thought, Copyright 1970 by Educational Resources Corporation.")
↑ Coulombe, Charles A. (2003). A History of the Popes: Vicars of Christ. MJF Books. p.392.
↑ White, Steven F. (2020). Modern Italy's Founding Fathers: The Making of a Postwar Republic. Bloomsbury Publishing. pp.108–109.
↑ Mammarealla, Giuseppe (1966). Italy After Fascism A Political History 1943–1965. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. p.114.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
Politicsportal 
