New York
How fair a rule is monarchy? A Byzantine scholar wrote that it was the fairest, to the point that God sustained it, as long as the emperors were elected by the army or an aristocratic senate. With their coronation, legitimate successors and usurpers alike automatically became sacred. The ancient Greeks went a step further. They did not require a god-like sustenance nor perfection from their kings, only greatness. Agamemnon, Menelaus, Odysseus, Achilles, Leonidas — they were all great kings but not perfect human beings.
Practical Romans distrusted Greek morality about kings and heroes, and in Marcus Aurelius they produced the supreme type of philosopher-king that Plato had merely dreamed of. Marcus wrote in his Meditations: ‘One should rule in accordance with reason, in obedience to Providence, in the service of his subjects.’ (Just like the self-appointed King of Kings, the scumbag Gaddafi.) Poor old Marcus, his reign was one disaster after another. Treason, a terrible plague, war and bankruptcy. He sacrificed his own life to preserve the vain life of his subjects. So much for good intentions.
The modern world has put water in its wine — an old Greek expression — and kings and queens nowadays are mostly constitutional monarchs, except of course in joke countries like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and the rest of the tiny kleptocracies with black gold gushing underneath. Late in life I became convinced that a bad constitutional monarch is nevertheless superior to a good president. Modern politics have poisoned our system to such an extent that only a non-elected monarch can succeed in uniting the people.
Look at Japan, and how the emperor managed to keep a twice-nuked country suffering terrible losses after the war from turning into a Somalia. Sure, the Japanese people are homogeneous, hard-working and extremely disciplined. But if the Mikado had not been sustained in his position by the American Caesar, I am not so sure Japan would have become the second economic power in the world as soon as it did.
Then look at my country, the joke of Europe, as president after president looked the other way while the very people who had put him there stole the country blind. Greece was a thriving country when the monarchy was abolished in a referendum where the king was not permitted equal time. In fact, he watched the results from London.
Ditto Italy, an ungovernable nation which only a monarch could unite, but the last one abdicated because he won the referendum in 1946 by only a slight margin. (And the communists were determined to call for civil disobedience if he had remained.)
The case of Germany is a strange one. It’s the richest and most successful country in Europe, although its army is ridiculous. One thing I am certain of is that had the Kaiser not been forced to abdicate, Hitler would never have become chancellor. By October 1918, after the Ludendorff offensive had collapsed under Allied counterattacks, Turkey, Austria and Bulgaria had given up, and by 3 November, the imperial navy had mutinied at Kiel. The Kaiser abdicated six days later. With the swift collapse of central authority, revolutionary sentiments spread from Bolshevik Russia to Germany. But Germany’s renewal had to come, as it did, from the right (especially after the Spartacist revolt of 1919), not the left. A kaiser could have managed the middle way. But I digress.
Today the Scandinavian countries are constitutional monarchies and are sitting pretty; the Netherlands also and even Belgium are held together by their monarchs. Which of course brings me to the wedding of 29 April. Like all fair-minded people I hope that William one day becomes king and his bride queen. Poor old Camilla has too much baggage, at least the great monarchist expert Taki seems to think so. Why give professional trouble-makers an opportunity to make a stink. Why bring phony Diana worshippers back to the forefront of the anti-monarchist campaign. I actually think Prince Charles would make a great elder statesman and adviser to his son if he stepped aside, and William a very popular king once he succeeds to the throne. It would give the monarchy the boost it needs, what with the minor royals having done their best these past 30 years to boost the Daily Mail’s circulation.
And now an admission by yours truly of my Easter spirit and compassion for the royal couple. It was no secret among the Spectator group that the sainted editor was going to be my best man when I married the deputy editor on 29 April at the Brompton Oratory. Then the Speccie received an hysterical call from Buck House asking the sainted one to change dates as the crowds might get confused and cheer us rather than the royals. I said no way. The sainted editor gave in. The deputy editor was delighted, hence making this the third time my marriage has been postponed.
To make things even worse, Pugs members also demonstrated their Easter spirit by blackballing Bernard-Henri Lévy and Jeffrey Epstein. I find this appallingly elitist, racist, sexist and anti-Semitic. All this behind my back while I’m training for the Judo championships five days after Easter in Orlando, Florida. It’s been a very rough week for the poor little Greek boy, yet again left standing at the altar.
Happy Easter to all of you, except to the man who rang from Buckingham Palace.
Comments