hello and good afternoon to you all! I am a rather new monarchist, and as a school project, I am discussing why monarchies are the way forward. does anyone have any advice or anything of the sort that could get me started?
I'd recommend reading Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes, and Reflections of a Russian Statesman by Konstantin Pobedonostsev if you can find an English translation, those will provide a number of solid arguments right there. You could also check out An Open Letter to Open Minded Progressives by Curtis Yarvin and Leviathan and It's Enemies by Sam Francis if your looking for resources written by Americans.
To give a fairly basic argument, I would point out that in any society with hereditary wealth, there will form a class of the hereditarily wealthy. In the past, these were called Aristocrats, and they held a special legal status where they were subject to different laws and expectations than commoners. The problem is, in modern democracies everyone is treated the same under the law, regardless of their financial or social capabilities. This fails when someone is wealthy enough to bribe their way past the legal system, is friendly enough with the judges to get their way, or can simply hire the best and most connected lawyers. Even if under our current system, we placed such individuals within their own legal status, their wealth and connections could circumvent their limitations.
One of the most important tasks of Monarchs historically was to keep the Aristocrats in line. The Monarch would be wealthy enough to be near impossible to bribe, and he would have a self-interested desire to keep the Aristocrats in their place, lest they supplant him or simply overthrow him. Often, Monarchs did this by acting as a champion of the people, knocking the Aristocrats down a peg or two when they stepped out of line or abused the commoners, which strengthened the Monarch's image in the eyes of the common people, and reminded the Aristocrats of who was in charge.
you could argue how stable monarchist nations are, example: Lichtenstein, Monaco, Sweden, you could also argue national unity for monarchies specifically the United kingdom, canada, Australia, and new zealand all share the windsor monarchy and thus have strong ties to each other
I'd recommend reading Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes, and Reflections of a Russian Statesman by Konstantin Pobedonostsev if you can find an English translation, those will provide a number of solid arguments right there. You could also check out An Open Letter to Open Minded Progressives by Curtis Yarvin and Leviathan and It's Enemies by Sam Francis if your looking for resources written by Americans.
To give a fairly basic argument, I would point out that in any society with hereditary wealth, there will form a class of the hereditarily wealthy. In the past, these were called Aristocrats, and they held a special legal status where they were subject to different laws and expectations than commoners. The problem is, in modern democracies everyone is treated the same under the law, regardless of their financial or social capabilities. This fails when someone is wealthy enough to bribe their way past the legal system, is friendly enough with the judges to get their way, or can simply hire the best and most connected lawyers. Even if under our current system, we placed such individuals within their own legal status, their wealth and connections could circumvent their limitations.
One of the most important tasks of Monarchs historically was to keep the Aristocrats in line. The Monarch would be wealthy enough to be near impossible to bribe, and he would have a self-interested desire to keep the Aristocrats in their place, lest they supplant him or simply overthrow him. Often, Monarchs did this by acting as a champion of the people, knocking the Aristocrats down a peg or two when they stepped out of line or abused the commoners, which strengthened the Monarch's image in the eyes of the common people, and reminded the Aristocrats of who was in charge.
you could argue how stable monarchist nations are, example: Lichtenstein, Monaco, Sweden, you could also argue national unity for monarchies specifically the United kingdom, canada, Australia, and new zealand all share the windsor monarchy and thus have strong ties to each other