Sunday, May 31, 2015
Where is the Monarchy World Power?
Now, I am sure there are many monarchists out there, reading these words, who would be very frustrated at the idea of having to choose between the People’s Republic of China and the United States of America. Personally, it would be an easy decision to make but I can certainly understand and sympathize with those who would prefer to choose neither. It would certainly be nice if there was another, monarchist, alternative to this duopoly. What other major power could, if not outmatch, at least give pause to these two giants? Russia is out of the question, being firmly tied to Communist China these days. The European Union has no military (yet) and even if it did, the military forces of Europe have been so drastically reduced to fund social welfare programs that they would hardly be worth considering. Additionally, despite including a number of monarchies, the European Union is a thoroughly, indeed radically, republican institution. What about simply trying to be patient and wait for one of the “emerging powers” to gain sufficient strength? Alas, these are all republics as well.
The easy answer would be to simply get angry (and boy is it easy) but that would not be the wise answer. Getting angry with Red China is bound to hurt your economy and while getting angry with America is easier it still accomplishes nothing. To really be a major world power these days several things are required and there simply isn’t a monarchy that possesses all of them. The United Kingdom is currently the only monarchy in the world with nuclear weapons but, while all the major players have nukes, possessing them ensures no other power is likely to attack you, they do not automatically allow one to project power around the world. Modern nuclear weapons are so fantastically destructive that even the most unhinged of regimes have never used them. To ever truly stand alongside the likes of America, China or Russia any monarchy in the world would have to drastically increase their military. They would also have to have a population large enough to draw a sizeable military force from as well as being large enough to be a lucrative market and produce wealth, thus becoming economically significant on a broad front. This is a thorny issue as most monarchies in the world are simply not capable of supporting an extremely large population. All the monarchies of Scandinavia combined have fewer people than the state of California alone and none have sufficient habitable land to sustain a great many more than they have.
Yet, every monarchy is as capable of making at least as good (or least bad) decisions as any of the numerous republics that have grown to be world powers. They could place a greater priority on the military side of their budgets, focus on more growing wealth instead of redistributing in an effort to make everyone blandly lower-middle class, cut off the benefits and teach people to be self-sufficient and endeavor to achieve greater national unity and foreign policy focus. Were such a thing to even be attempted, monarchies would have a significant advantage by their very nature. They could then take a more assertive role in international affairs. Of course, even at their best, most would still be unable to rise too high but by building coalitions they could give the ‘big boys’ a run for their money. If, as I have often argued, all the English-speaking monarchies could cooperate more closely together and if the Latin American republics were to cling more closely to their mother Spain they could play a part on the world stage well out of proportion to their individual strength. Simply instilling a greater sense of national pride and that your monarchy, be it Belgium or Sweden or any other, has something to contribute to the world would be a great start.