The significance of Monarchy
Perhaps for some the retention of monarchy looks anachronistic, even primitive. The death of the longest reigning monarch in our history on 8 September 2022 brought a lot of misunderstanding, to be kind, to light. Let's think out loud about what the monarchy isn't first.
The monarchy is head of state in the UK, but this is a constitutional monarchy and has been for hundreds of years. The power of the monarch started to become constrained as early as the Magna Carta in 1215. So the UK monarch has no real political power. This means that this head of state position isn’t equivalent to the president of the USA, for example. The final decision when it comes to political matters is with the Prime Minister. Policies successful and disastrous therefore lie with the Prime Minister and Parliament. Yes, Royal Assent does exist which requires all laws passed in Parliament to be signed into law by the monarch, but this is a matter of convention. The last time Royal Assent was refused was over 300 years ago and that was because government ministers advised Queen Anne to do so. It’s not something that can be exercised arbitrarily, not without causing a crisis.
As to what the monarchy is, while the separation of powers isn’t as formalised or distinct as it is in the USA due to greater overlaps, it does exist to a degree and with a powerful extension:
Executive
Legislative
Judicial
Symbolic
It’s that symbolic division that's the province of the monarchy. The monarch is a symbol of the nature of the nation. Every week, the Prime Minister goes to meet the monarch and kneels, bows or curtsies to them. The significance of this is that the Prime Minister, who carries all of the political power in the nation, is required to humble themselves to something greater than them. The momentary needs of a Prime Minister are therefore held in balance against the timeless needs of the nation that will still be here when everyone's forgotten who the Prime Minister is. By having to bow before something else, the Prime Minister is given a reminder, whether they choose to truly heed it or not, that their power is limited. Everything that the nation is, established over the course of over a thousand years, is behind the monarch. Compared to that, any single politician is as nothing.
And that’s a good idea. What citizens critical of monarchies in the modern era can easily overlook in the contrast of republic and constitutional monarchy is the capability of republics to be tyrannical. That’s most clear perhaps in the French Revolution which, once it had consumed the monarchy, turned inward upon itself. Georges Danton, who prosecuted king Louis XVI, was executed for conspiracy less than 18 months after Louis XVI.
Yes, a republic is technically a more democratic and modern system than a monarchy. However, the contrast is most powerful when a republic is compared to an absolute monarchy rather than a constitutional monarchy. Is it clear that, today, the USA is a notably freer or more democratic nation than the UK?
And yes, the UK has experimented with sole rule by parliament following the Civil War, as a result of which the country became a hereditary dictatorship. Oliver Cromwell, as Lord Protector, was succeeded by his son, Richard. Nine months later he had to resign and the restoration of the monarchy began, led by parliamentarians. Today, what would a republic mean for us?
President Tony Blair
President David Cameron
President Jeremy Corbyn
President Boris Johnson
Put simply, it would see the Royal Family replaced by what Robin Day called here today gone tomorrow politicians focused first and foremost on their own election cycle. This is most clear in the USA where the President spends half of their four year term campaigning for reelection.
Perhaps one of the things that can drive republics to tyranny is their desire to ensure that they command the same loyalty as a monarch. But being here today gone tomorrow means that they will never achieve that so they turn to violence, to tyranny. Another might be that the rulers that emerge out of republics aren’t equipped to symbolise the nature of the nation and the attempt drives them into mock royalty. The French journalist Marc Roche said that France has presidents who behave like royalty. We can see the same thing in the discount dynasties of American political power who seem to be driven mad by their expectation that they should have the trappings of monarchy while still being the executive. The weight is too great for them, for anyone, to bear.
It took the death of Queen Elisabeth II to bring all of this to the surface. It’s helped me understand that, despite its faults, the monarchy is something ancient and permanent. We routinely abandon so much established knowledge to rootless hyper-novelty.
It’s helped me understand that I am a royalist because something needs to exist that can humble the here today gone tomorrow politicians.
Something needs to be forever.