Monarchist Grit, Green, & Dipper. For a while now this blog has been
trying to join The Progressive
Bloggers, a blog aggregator for
blogs that are progressive in
nature (if that wasn't obvious from
the name).
trying to join The Progressive
Bloggers, a blog aggregator for
blogs that are progressive in
nature (if that wasn't obvious from
the name).
"But monarchy isn't progressive!"
~progressives & conservatives yelling in unison
Since I've gotten this comment from both sides I wanted to
write an article explaining my reasoning for why this blog has
every right to be on that aggregator (it is this argument that
kept it off of it for so long).
I have written before about how monarchy can be considered
a progressive institution so I will not re-tread the arguments
here. By all means check out the link above though. But if
monarchy is a progressive ideal why do conservatives support
it?
This question touches on the central theme of this post:
Monarchy is progressive in nature but conservative in its
organization. Monarchy symbolizes many of the things that
conservatives hold dear: tradition, personal authority, moral
rectitude, and an ordered society. Now progressives don't
value all of these things as highly as conservatives so maybe it
makes sense that they often don't see the value of monarchy
as clearly.
Occasionally, they do. The last US presidential election had
even progressive publications wondering if the republic
itself was at fault. Way back in 2007 Maclean's Magazine
published an editorial looking at the then recent episode of
the King of Spain asking a belligerent Hugo Chávez, "Why
don’t you shut up?". They noted that,"As a monarch set above
politics and with the honour of his country at stake, King
Juan Carlos had both the status and occasion to put Chávez
in his place. Deflator of windbags. Perhaps there is a role for
a modern monarchy after all". Countries without a monarchy
don't have the equivalent figure to stand up to boorish leader
of the executive. A figure capable of knocking them down a
peg and getting them back to work. Even when not actively
telling a politician to can it, by occupying the most prestigious
position in society they prevent other, perhaps more volatile,
people from doing so. Such people, incidentally, tend not to
favour social order and can't be trusted to play nice with our
traditions. The institution of monarchy is best suited for
protecting our Canadian customs and ensuring the stability
to nurture future progress.
Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour
~progressives & conservatives yelling in unison
Since I've gotten this comment from both sides I wanted to
write an article explaining my reasoning for why this blog has
every right to be on that aggregator (it is this argument that
kept it off of it for so long).
I have written before about how monarchy can be considered
a progressive institution so I will not re-tread the arguments
here. By all means check out the link above though. But if
monarchy is a progressive ideal why do conservatives support
it?
This question touches on the central theme of this post:
Monarchy is progressive in nature but conservative in its
organization. Monarchy symbolizes many of the things that
conservatives hold dear: tradition, personal authority, moral
rectitude, and an ordered society. Now progressives don't
value all of these things as highly as conservatives so maybe it
makes sense that they often don't see the value of monarchy
as clearly.
Occasionally, they do. The last US presidential election had
even progressive publications wondering if the republic
itself was at fault. Way back in 2007 Maclean's Magazine
published an editorial looking at the then recent episode of
the King of Spain asking a belligerent Hugo Chávez, "Why
don’t you shut up?". They noted that,"As a monarch set above
politics and with the honour of his country at stake, King
Juan Carlos had both the status and occasion to put Chávez
in his place. Deflator of windbags. Perhaps there is a role for
a modern monarchy after all". Countries without a monarchy
don't have the equivalent figure to stand up to boorish leader
of the executive. A figure capable of knocking them down a
peg and getting them back to work. Even when not actively
telling a politician to can it, by occupying the most prestigious
position in society they prevent other, perhaps more volatile,
people from doing so. Such people, incidentally, tend not to
favour social order and can't be trusted to play nice with our
traditions. The institution of monarchy is best suited for
protecting our Canadian customs and ensuring the stability
to nurture future progress.
Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour
RSS Feed
