tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post5762267190672203826..comments2024-03-16T01:00:19.876-05:00Comments on The Mad Monarchist: Kings and ConstitutionsMadMonarchisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08083008336883267870noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-6041784000909706252011-09-01T17:45:56.357-05:002011-09-01T17:45:56.357-05:00Congratulations on this great post.Congratulations on this great post.Manuel Marques Pinto de Rezendehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18265528253922767869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-14866851808205079272011-08-07T18:45:12.919-05:002011-08-07T18:45:12.919-05:00True but my intention here was not on the issue of...True but my intention here was not on the issue of popular sovereignty, it was simply to point out that no matter what documents or economic system or political formula you have it cannot replace the need for personal, individual virtue and correct morality. What I find disturbing is that so many people seem to think that if they have the "right system" there will be peace, prosperity and happiness no matter how vile and degenerate the people may be. This, of course, is not so and even if the "system" is one I approve of and think better than all others, it still requires the people, the rulers and the ruled, to behave in an upright and correct fashion.<br /><br />There is no escaping the human element.MadMonarchisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08083008336883267870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-62108115656210799522011-08-07T18:04:57.631-05:002011-08-07T18:04:57.631-05:00On the subject of constitutions, I think the Frenc...On the subject of constitutions, I think the French Constitutional Charter of 1814, (Bourbon), and the Additional Act of 1815 (couched as an amendment to the Imperoal Constitutions of 1804 (Year XII and its republican antecedents) were excellent monarchial constitutional documents, as was the French Imperial Constitution of 1870 (amending the Constitution of 1852).El Jefe Maximohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14661511063910659377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-78151082577828661272011-08-06T12:40:00.859-05:002011-08-06T12:40:00.859-05:00I think the issue is not so much whether there is ...I think the issue is not so much whether there is or there isn't a constitution, be it written or unwritten, with little or significant power awarded to the monarch. Probably all monarchies have a constitution, that is, an organic structure and rules that more or less explain the way it works. <br />The problem for monarchies is the acceptance of the doctrine of national or popular sovereignty. That is, its acceptance in the modern sense: popular sovereignty can only be exercised by an elected assembly. Sovereignty is the (theoretical) power to do everything, including overthrowing the monarchy. This way, even well-beloved monarchs must pursue popularity to ensure survival, on a longer term than politicians but in much the same way. This vulnerability deprives constitutional monarchy of the independence necessary to exercise the impartial judgment that makes the institution so useful.<br />Of course, I understand that surviving constitutional monarchies may be useful insofar they preserve some elements of old monarchy, so that the people are familiarized with it and don't think it a relic of the past. However, I think we might agree that this use can only be entirely fruitful if it is pointed towards future restoration.Firmus et Rusticushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16029537490294717541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-52857638433846436962011-08-05T13:31:28.584-05:002011-08-05T13:31:28.584-05:00Yes, it is no coincidence that, in this country at...Yes, it is no coincidence that, in this country at least, no matter who wins or loses it is the lawyers who always come out ahead. In the old days, of course, there was a little more balance with senators being appointed by the states to represent the states (sort of like the Imperial German Bundesrat perhaps) but then they became elected as well -thanks to that self-righteous butthead Woodrow Wilson. But that's another story.MadMonarchisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08083008336883267870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-34080603286044522282011-08-05T11:25:55.403-05:002011-08-05T11:25:55.403-05:00I believe that you have made excellent points here...I believe that you have made excellent points here, MM. I would add also that anytime you have a monolithic institution like a democratic republic, all of whose branches derive power from the same source, then no constitution will stand in its way for long as it seeks its own interest, since government courts are the sole arbitrators of the constitutionality of government action. Convenient. If I were in a mood to be infuriatingly precise, I would also add that in the most technical sense, all states have a constitution, even if it is unwritten and says no more than "as the Emperor wills it, so shall it be."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-59288944840513440162011-08-05T07:50:56.417-05:002011-08-05T07:50:56.417-05:00All true of course, but I can't help but feel ...All true of course, but I can't help but feel like a broken record everytime we monarchists have to repeat these points.Servant of the Chiefhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17018786429076784275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-25216084479539397032011-08-05T03:30:42.293-05:002011-08-05T03:30:42.293-05:00I think the US Constitution is a pretty good one a...I think the US Constitution is a pretty good one and I wish was more closely adhered to, but it is true that many have gone so far as to regard it as a sacred object. Furthermore, many governments from Latin America to Africa have copied it almost verbatim -and failed miserably, so obviously a constitution cannot be full proof -or fool proof.MadMonarchisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08083008336883267870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-14339996103364879552011-08-05T02:43:48.295-05:002011-08-05T02:43:48.295-05:00Bravo. I'm going to post a link to this articl...Bravo. I'm going to post a link to this article on my blog as soon as I find the time.<br /><br />To my mind, democratic republics certainly seem prone to turning their written constitutions into fetish objects. Which is ironic, given how often they level accusations of irrationalism at supporters of monarchy.<br /><br />And Tom Sunic has pointed out that some of the most democratic provisions ever enacted were to be found in the constitutions of repressive communist regimes - but that one has to look at the criminal code to see the true nature of the political order in force.Mac an Ríhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17892787328087208121noreply@blogger.com