Monarchists are Mad in Uganda

The musical monarchist over at Royal World blog reports a story from the BBC about royalist riots in the east African nation of Uganda. The riots started in reaction to government efforts to keep the King Muwenda Mutebi III of the Buganda (the largest Ugandan ethnic group) from visiting a troubled region near Kampala. Uganda is a republic but in recent years has allowed the restoration of the four major tribal monarchies as cultural figures only -without political power. However, the monarchs, like King Muwenda Mutebi III, have displayed the strength of the royal position even without political power as the monarchs have used the traditional support they have from the public to hold the government accountable in upholding the laws of the country. Needless to say this has annoyed the political big-shots on a number of occasions.

MM Video: Kings of the Two Sicilies

Mad Rant: Roots of Revolution III

In terms of modern revolutionary republicanism we have seen the Bolsheviks set communism/socialism loose on the world in our own time and how all of their political roots trace back to the great horror of modern European history; the French Revolution. Yet, an argument can be made that the French Revolution would not have happened without the example of the American Revolution still so fresh in their minds. There is certainly some truth to this and it is certainly true that the American rebels would not have been successful without the support of the Kingdom of France. However, the French economy was in hard shape even before they broke the bank backing American separatists and the radical revolutionary elements in the American colonies were inspired by the philosophes of Europe; not the other way around. One could also make a strong case that the American War for Independence would not have happened had the British not won the earlier French and Indian War.

The Americans were driven by a growing strain of liberalism in their own English-speaking tradition which went back to the Revolution of 1688 when Parliament asserted dominance over the monarchy and hereditary succession, back to the English Civil War which saw the overthrow and regicide of King Charles the Martyr and even that act; putting a monarch on trial with the result of regicide, had already been done in England with the execution of Mary Queen of Scots. All of these were examples of chipping away at the sacred nature of the monarchy. And, just as some monarchs on the island of Britain were unwittingly complicit in this, so too were some French monarchs on the continent. What was it then that was finally at the root of this creeping disease that put it in the hearts of men to rise against traditional authority?

It was, of course, a combination of things on the part of monarchs and governments but at heart it was a spiritual disease. What was this sickness that saw itself manifested in Queen Elizabeth I having Mary Queen of Scots beheaded or King Louis XIV of France laughing off the pleas and warnings of St Margaret Marie Alacoque? It was overall a failure to recognize the dangerous venom that was revolution. A failure to recognize the true, eternal and global enemy of humanity. What exactly is it that causes “revolutionism” to flourish? What are the weapons used to lure people into the revolutionary camp? There were coups, changes of dynasty and changes of rule in the past that had not gone to the extent of revolutionary republicanism. So what was it, and what is it, essentially that has been driving this whole movement?

It is the evil which causes someone to look at a monarch and hate him because he is more exalted than they are. It is the evil which causes someone to desire for themselves the highest place and the arrogance to seize power to be the sole master of their own universe. In short, it is evil personified. It is the same evil which the Holy Prophet Isaiah spoke of when he quoted, “and thou didst say in thy heart, ‘I will exalt my throne above the stars of Heaven…I will ascend above the heights of the clouds and I will be like the All Highest”.

Yes, it is the same, exactly the same, the same disease that has been creeping through the world even before the dawn of existence. It is the coveting of power and position, the arrogance and the willful desire to bow to no one which caused a third of the stars to fall from the heavens. The same spirit which says everyone should be their own monarch and which had said to the ancestors of humanity, do this and ‘you will be like gods’. We see it manifested the revolutionary goals of today, lowering all of humanity to the level of the beasts, allowing no distinctions between subject and sovereign, between moral and immoral, between male and female even between humanity and the animals in extreme cases being enacted today.

And it is the same all over the world. The “Divine Sage” of the Far East, Confucius, spoke of harmony coming from the mastery of five relationships: emperor-subject, husband-wife, parents-children, older siblings-younger siblings and friend-friend. How many of these have been destroyed or are imperiled even today by the revolutionary movement? Monarchs are gone or under threat of extinction, husbands and wives can easily divorce or even have husbands and husbands and wives and wives. Children can divorce their parents as well and the revolutionary governments want to raise the little ones themselves. They want us to all be envious in order to tear down the established order but they also want us to all be the same, a uniform, cultureless, tradition-less population of sheep, fuel for their own system, mindless, nameless automatons who will serve the all powerful government and think no more of ourselves than they do; so many vermin to run in place, spinning the wheels that keep the government machine running.

This is the “big picture”, this is the enemy, the root of the evil that has been bedeviling humanity since the dawn of time and continues to weave its insidious web to this very day. It’s all part of the same thing. The same trends, the same themes, the same goals then as now. That is the way I see it, that is why I support who I do and oppose who I do and that is the end of this little 3-part rant. And, I am, as ever, The Mad Monarchist.

Remembering September 11, 2001

It is hard to believe that eight years have passed since the 9-11 attacks. I remember that morning very well, being up early for a dental appointment. I turned on the news and the first tower had already been hit. Everyone thought it had been some kind of an accident until the second plane plowed into the other tower. I watched it happen and you could feel the tension as everyone knew America was under attack. Word came in of two more planes being hijacked and no one was sure just how widespread this disaster would be. I remember fighter jets flying air cover over Washington DC and as I drove south the next day the bridge to Mexico was sealed off and border agents were wearing body armor and carrying M-16's. It was like nothing I or anyone else had ever experienced before. Family members in the military were called to their bases and we knew it would only be a matter of time before the game of war was afoot. However, rather than reflect on the disaster of 9-11, keeping to the "theme" of this blog, I thought it appropriate to flesh out the monarchist dimension of this crisis.

It should surprise no one that the man responsible for 9-11, the infamous coward Osama bin-Laden, is a republican of sorts. Born in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia he is an avowed enemy of the Saudi monarchy and would like to see them replaced by a Taliban-style theocracy (picture a Sunni version of the Islamic Republic of Iran only worse and you'll be off to a good start). Likewise, it is worth remembering that the Taliban was only able to come to power after the rightful king, Mohammad Zahir Shah, had been overthrown in a coup by his prime minister. Following the destruction of the Taliban government it was, naturally, unthinkable to the US government to support the restoration of the King though he was finally able to return to his homeland and was declared the "Father of the Country" by the new republican government and, at least, monarchists were able to run for office and compete in national elections which was certainly not the case under the Taliban.

Alongside the US forces in Afghanistan many monarchies have contributed to the "War on Terror" including the United Kingdom, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway, Spain, Australia, Japan and New Zealand. The 2003 invasion of Iraq by coalition forces proved more controversial but was at least similar to the Afghanistan case in that a usurping republican dictator was overthrown and monarchist parties were able to compete in the electoral process for the first time since the destruction of the Kingdom of Iraq in 1958 with the massacre of the King and Royal Family by pro-Marxist revolutionaries. Although that monarchy was something of a creation and certainly had its problems, it should be remembered that it was the last Iraqi government to have a working parliamentary system. So, the next time someone complains that the republic isn't working because Iraqis have "never had a democracy" you can point out that they did -under the monarchy! What the future holds for these new regimes and for the "War on Terror" or whatever the Obama government is calling it these days to avoid offending anyone, only time will tell. 9-11 is a day to remember and it should be for monarchists as well, remembering that the terrorist regimes in Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq which have been the source of so much trouble all came to power through the death of monarchies and the radical terrorists who are still causing trouble today are just as anti-monarchy (seeing it as un-Islamic of all things) as any secularist republican.

Consort Profile: Margaret of Provence

The Queen of France and consort to the great King St Louis IX, Margaret of Provence was born in 1221 the daughter of the Count of Provence Raymond Berenger IV. On May 27, 1234 she married King Louis IX at Sens and was crowned Queen of France the following day. She was a famous beauty with dark hair and dark eyes and there are numerous stories about her little acts of kindness toward her devoutly religious husband. The marriage had been arranged by the Queen Mother Blanche of Castile to cement the support of the Count of Provence in the seemingly endless war with England. However, she was none too fond of Queen Margaret and treated her rather harshly, over time fearing her ambition and seeming fondness of the English. The attitude of St Louis toward his wife is more controversial. Some sources say he distrusted his wife and treated her coldly while other sources state that the couple truly loved each other. The truth seems to be that the King did love and trust his wife but his humble, pious character was somewhat at odds with the more forceful Queen Margaret.

Queen Margaret was a strong right arm to St Louis and his closest advisor. She was also certainly not a timid woman and accompanied the King on his crusade, displaying particular heroism at Damietta where she gave birth to Prince Jean Tristan. She became the only woman to lead a crusade when her husband was captured and it was Queen Margaret who oversaw the negotiations for his release.

In France Queen Margaret raised more than a few eyebrows because of her opposition to her brother-in-law Charles of Anjou who had married her sister Beatrice and her admiration for King Henry III of England who was married to her sister Eleanor. In 1263 she had Prince Philip, heir to the French throne, take an oath that even after acceding to the throne he would continue to obey his mother until he was 30 years old. St Louis saw this as overreaching and yet binding as oath was something sacred. To get out of it he had to petition Pope Urban IV to release his son from his promise. Queen Margaret stayed in France when St Louis left on his second crusade where he died.

After that time Queen Margaret returned to Provence, keeping in touch with her beloved sister Eleanor. She tried to maintain her rule of Provence county in preference to Charles of Anjou. When the clouds of war gathered she called upon her son, her nephew King Edward II of England and Rudolf von Hapsburg the King of Germany for assistance. She maintained her claim to Provence until after the death of Charles in 1285 when Philip the Bold persuaded her to accept an income from Anjou in place of her rights over Provence. Four and a half years after the death of her sister Queen Eleanor, Queen Margaret followed her in 1295 at the age of 74.

Dutch Royals Visit New York

(left to right: Mayor of New York City Michael Bloomberg, HRH Princess Maxima, HRH Prince Willem-Alexander of Orange and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton)

The heir to the Dutch throne and his wife are visiting New York City, being shown the sites by Mayor Bloomberg and Hillary Clinton, to start a week-long commemoration of the arrival of the Dutch in New York (which they had named New Netherland) some 400 years ago. The Prince and Princess of Orange were greeted with a 21-gun salute and music by the US Marine Corps band as they addressed the crowd from the deck of the USS Intrepid. Alongside in the harbor were a number of watching ships including an exact replica of the famous Half Moon; the Dutch vessel that carried Henry Hudson to the New World those many centuries ago. The Prince of Orange spoke well of New York and Mayor Bloomberg and Hillary outlined the long shared history of the Netherlands and the United States, Bloomberg making mention of the Royal Netherlands forces fighting alongside the US military in Afghanistan today. 400 Years ago the Dutch established a colony in what is now New York, which they named New Netherland and held for a fair amount of time before being conquered by the English who renamed the area New York in honor of the First Lord of the Admiralty, who was then the Duke of York, who later went on to become King James II of Great Britain. You can read the details at the New York Daily News.

MM Video: Belgian Royal Army

Mad Rant: Roots of Revolution II

The revolutions that have shook the world in the 20th Century were spawned by the Bolshevik revolution in Russia in 1917. However, they took their inspiration for earlier examples which were, fortunately, less successful. Why, for example, was the red flag the adopted color of the revolutionaries and why did Bolshevik bands play the Marseillaise? That is because all of the republican elements, and revolutionary communists particularly, of the early 20th Century waxed nostalgic for the bloody failure that was the Paris Commune of 1871. This was the most famous of the revolutionary communes that sprang up following the overthrow of the French Emperor Napoleon III after his defeat at the hands of the Prussians. The commune has assumed epic status amongst the revolutionary enemies of civilization who are fixed in a sort of trance by it for no one could reasonably explain any attraction to it. It was an epic failure and Paris under the commune was a picture of suffering, brought down suddenly and swiftly by Prussian bayonets.

This would probably not have been the case had not the mob of Paris already acquired something of a reputation for the bloody overthrow of governments. The communards (communists -it’s not a huge leap) looked back to the revolutions of 1848 that shook the traditional order of Europe. However, these were a disjointed and largely unsuccessful series of national uprisings who were themselves all born out of the satanic womb that was the French Revolution and there we see the head of the snake that later manifested itself as communism, socialism or radical, revolutionary republicanism of any other name. The French Revolution was the culmination of a rising tide of liberalism that had been coming to a head in the 18th Century. It rode in on a wave of growing skepticism against religion and monarchy and an increased arrogance on the part of humanity. They rejected moral absolutes and traditional authority, especially when based on religion and hereditary monarchy.

One need only to look to the actions of the French Revolutionaries to see how their venom has infected subsequent generations down to the present day. They began with seemingly innocent calls for democracy and then swiftly passed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy to bring religion under government control (notice that this is almost invariably the first thing on the agenda of any revolutionary program). The monarchy was no longer treated with respect, then stripped of most powers, then stripped of all powers and then finally abolished. This same program is repeated every time communist/socialist elements attain power at varying speeds depending on how swiftly they think they can get away with doing it. Do we not see this even today? It is happening in the vast majority of the world’s remaining monarchies right now. Finally, they persecute those who are opposed to their radical ideology; those who are not “politically correct”. They wish to remake society on some artificial model and produce the most bloodthirsty monsters who think nothing of massacring their own people to accomplish these goals and secure their own grip on power. It is the same story whether the person in question is Marat or Mao. They will abolition religion altogether and replace it with a state religion to worship the revolution. It was done in Red China, Soviet Russia and it was done first in revolutionary France. They were not the first, however, to think the unthinkable nor was their wickedness born in a vacuum.

Monaco in World War II

Recently the Principality of Monaco celebrated its liberation day from the occupying forces of Nazi Germany. Read about Monaco in the Second World War.

King Juan Carlos Faces the Enemy

King Juan Carlos of Spain greets the leader of the communist-led leftist coalition that wishes to put him out of a job (notice the King wore a red tie for the occasion). The group, known as the "United Left" actually laid out for the King of Spain their hopes and plans for the eventual abolition of the Spanish monarchy and the creation of the 3rd Spanish Republic. I have every sympathy for the King of Spain in having to even speak to these people and it is to his credit that he is able to smile and bear it as a gentleman. Imagine the nerve of someone laying out to their monarch their own plans for his removal! Only communist criminals could look back at the history of republican Spain with all of the riots, chaos, massacres, oppression, atrocities, Soviet domination and civil wars and think that they should give it another try! I'm sure somewhere Generalissimo Franco was looking on and saying, "that's gratitude for you!"

Shameless Plug

(all credit/blame for this plug goes to blog reader AlbertaRoyalist for giving me the notion)

MM Video: King George VI

Mad Rant: Roots of Revolution I

The roots of revolutionary republicanism run deep. Like a plague engulfing the world they have spread their poison from one outbreak to infect nations across the globe and each out break can be traced back to a point of origin that itself can be traced back over vast amounts of time and distance. The most recent outbreak that has infected modern times and continues to spread its poison around the world began in Russia with the overthrow of the Russian Empire by the Bolsheviks and the subsequent creation of the Soviet Union.

One of the first major mistakes people make is to assume that communism and socialism are two different things when in fact they are both simply different stages in the evolution of the revolutionary program. Not everyone might be aware of just how communist many countries today, even monarchies, are which claim to be “merely” socialist rather than communists. How many are aware that it was the Bolsheviks who first legalized homosexuality and gay “marriage”? The supposedly tame socialist parties have been pushing this same agenda across Europe in many monarchies. It was also the Bolsheviks who first pledged to “liberate” women from their traditional roles of being wives and mothers. Sound familiar? They have always been the avowed enemies of tradition; particularly traditional authority as represented by monarchy and religion. And, they are internationalists.

From Soviet Russia and the regicide of Tsar Nicholas II the Bolsheviks spread into Mongolia and saw the overthrow of the Bogd Khan. Next, China, where even though the monarchy had been officially gone for several years it was a communist warlord who expelled the last Emperor from the Forbidden City in 1924. After World War II the communists had their big chance and extended their rule on all fronts which meant the end of the Kings of Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Albania as well as the consolidation of communist rule in China. They took northern Korea, overthrew the last Emperor of Vietnam and eventually expanded across the whole of that country as well as Laos, Cambodia, Angola, Mozambique and Cuba.

However, if anyone thinks that the end of the “Cold War” meant the end of the communist threat they are sorely mistaken. Their campaign continues to this day, and often successfully, under the guise of the many socialist governments that hold power across a far more vast collection of nations that the communist Soviets or Maoists ever could. They have pushed the same agenda everywhere and it all points in the same revolutionary direction; redistribution of wealth which is inherently at odds with the very principle of a hierarchical society and inherited rights. Even in socialist societies that have retained their monarchies they have been reduced to powerless figureheads, still of symbolic importance and even then the efforts to remove them never cease. That is because each side represents something inherently in conflict with the other. As the socialists push their agenda traditional values are destroyed, the monarch is made powerless, respect for the monarchy is reduced further and further until they are removed altogether. This is why there is no country in the world in which monarchists can afford to be complacent no matter how outwardly stable things seem to be.

Chipping Away at the Great in Britain

I am a little surprised that this story (which has been out for a while) has not attracted more attention from the Angloblogosphere. I would not have known about it were it not for the report from the American Monarchist. The story covers the announcement from the palace that those who are given an audience with the Queen are no longer required to bow their head and walk out of the royal presence backwards. I realize this is not a *huge* issue and yet I still see it as a further chipping away of respect for the Crown and thus yet another attack on the "Great" in Great Britain. I will admit, I am a bit obsessive on this issue. I love seeing officials in Thailand crawl on their hands & knees before the throne, I winced when reading of when the last Emperor of Vietnam abolished kowtowing in the 30's and I tend to look at the era of when visitors kissed the Pope's foot as 'the good ol'days'. All of these things are to foster respect for the monarchy, not simply the monarch him(her)self; it is what they represent. It never fails to infuriate me whenever anyone still complains about the (now non-mandatory) outward signs of respect given to someone like Queen Elizabeth II. For crying out loud, it has basically been reduced to a nod of the head from men and a half stumble for women! It's not as though anyone is being forced to get down on both knees and touch their forehead to the floor. This is also further proof that the revolutionary, leftist elements want nothing more than to rest power from royal hands. That is paramount but as trends like this show the ultimate goal is to take away the respect and reverence given to the Crown and finally to take away the Crown itself.

Monarchist Profile: Charles Merchior-Arthus Bonchamps

Charles Merchior-Arthus Bonchamps was born on May 10, 1760 in Anjou at the Chateau of the Crucifix. Once grown, Bonchamps journeyed to India in the regiment of Bailli de Suffren. He first saw battle fighting with the French forces in the American War for Independence and was promoted to captain in the grenadiers after his return. A staunch royalist, he resigned his position and retired when he did not like the direction the country seemed to be taking. After having been retired for some time before the revolution broke out, Bonchamps feared for his King and country and so requested to be reinstated. He was in the area when the Paris mob stormed the Tuilieres and helped to hide other notable royalists like La Rochejaquelein and Charles d'Autichamp from the revolutionaries.

In September he returned to Anjou and was denounced by the Jacobins. He was forced to stand trial at the tribunal at Maine-et-Loire but was acquited. The following year, in March of 1793, a group of peasants who were rising against the republicans requested that Bonchamps come and serve as their leader. He gladly accepted and joined the counter-revolutionary forces. Due to his courage and intellect, Bonchamps quickly began to assert himself as a great tactician in the Catholic & Royal Army. The people of the Vendee chose him as their leader and he was able to secure a great deal of supplies and weapons that would be essential for the counterrevolution.

Bonchamps was a hero in many battles and led his troops to many great victories. He participated in the capture of Bressuire, Thouars and Fontenay-le-Comte where he was wounded but managed to recover. However, the struggle was coming apart due to a lack of a unified command and at the cause seemed to lack direction. Many of the soldiers would often leave after a victorious battle to look after their families and farms. Disaster came on October 17, 1793 at the battle of Cholet. The heroes of the Vendee were defeated and Bonchamps was mortally wounded.

He was taken away and lingered for another day. His loyal soldiers wanted to kill the 5,000 republican prisoners they had taken whom they blamed for the death of their champion but Bonchamps refused to allow such a thing and pardoned them. There, on his death bed, Bonchamps stated that he was glad to have served his God, his King and his Country. The death of Bonchamps has been called the greatest victory for the republican forces. Bonchamps was arguably the best tactical leader in the Vendeean army and defeating him gave the blue army a huge morale boost. Bonchamps was and is a hero for the forces of the Christian monarchy, and was even admired by many of the revolutionaries. His success and natural class made him admired by both friends and enemies alike.

Austrian Archduke Turns 90

His Imperial Royal Highness Archduke Rudolf of Austria is 90 years old today. He is the youngest son of His Apostolic Majesty Emperor Charles I of Austria-Hungary and Empress Zita of Bourbon-Parma, born after the imperial couple had been forced to go into exile in Switzerland. He has worked on Wall Street and in the banking business and met his first wife, a Russian countess, in New York where the couple lived for many years. Later the Archduke settled in the Kingdom of Belgium. After his first wife died in a car accident he married a German princess in Bavaria. The Mad Monarchist joins all other Hapsburg loyalists in wishing His Imperial Royal Highness a happy 90th birthday!

Royal Profile: Madame Nhu

One of the most recognized and certainly one of the most controversial figures in the history of the short-lived Republic of Vietnam (Viet Nam Cong Hoa) was Tran Le Xuan, better known as Madame Nhu, the wife of Ngo Dinh Nhu, the brother of the first Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem and the unofficial "First Lady" of South Vietnam. Aside from her husband, Madame Nhu herself had quite an illustrious ancestry. Her mother was Than Trong Nam Tran who was a daughter of Princess Nhu Phien who was the youngest daughter of H.I.M. Dong Khanh, the ninth Emperor of the Nguyen Dynasty.

She married Ngo Dinh Nhu and converted to Christianity, becoming a zealous Catholic and a very public face for the young South Vietnamese government. Her husband, Ngo Dinh Nhu ran the Can Lao political movement in support of the personalist regime of Diem. Madame Nhu was, in every respect, a fiery and committed woman, which both her friends and her many enemies could agree on. She played a leading role in the moral reform President Diem instituted in South Vietnam, closing down brothels, opium dens and gambling houses. She was at the front of imposing what was known as the "campaign for public morality" on South Vietnam, which included the abolition of divorce, contraceptives and abortion. Nightclubs and ball rooms were also often targets. Even beauty pageants were halted as Madame Nhu believed they simply contributed to the objectification of women. This campaign of decency, while admirable, was met with a great deal of hostility by those who did not share Madame Nhu's view of ethics.

"The Dragon Lady" as she came to be called, was also a passionate anti-communist and was determined that women should play a leading role in defending their country from Communist infiltration. She formed a corps of women warriors and there is a famous photograph of her at their training ground, firing a .38 pistol for the first time. That event sums up a great deal of her character. Having never used a firearm before she was startled by the noise of the first shot. Laughing it off, she vowed that she would not flinch again and fired the remaining five rounds as though she were an expert. She also fostered a renewal of commemorations for the Trung Sisters, the heroic co-Queens of early Viet Nam who fought against Chinese occupation.

Madame Nhu was, like the rest of the Diem clan and most Vietnamese of her background, extremely devoted to her family. In her eyes, her husband was the heart of the Diem regime and could do no wrong. Commenting on the American effort to remove Ngo Dinh Nhu, she said that Diem refused because he knew that, as she said, "my husband could do without him, but he, he could not do without my husband". Ironically it was US agents who had pushed Diem (a lifelong monarchist) to depose the nominal head of state (the former Emperor) and make himself President. In due time they would turn against Diem for behaving more like a monarch himself than a politician. She was also extremely nationalistic and given to speaking her mind as bluntly as possible, which often caused huge public relations problems. The worst case came at the height of Buddhist protests against the Diem administration. Like others, she accused the Buddhists of being infiltrated by the Viet Cong and when a Buddhist monk from Hue burned himself alive in protest, she commented that it was the Buddhist leaders who "barbequed" the monk, and even then, had relied on foreign help as the gasoline used was imported.

Such outbursts, while acceptable to her supporters, outraged many people and caused the United States, which was quickly losing patience with the Diem government, to view Madame Nhu as a "loose canon". When other protests followed she caused another stir by saying, "Let them burn, and we will clap our hands". Finally, America decided to abandon the Diem administration and secretly backed the 1963 coup against him. After being removed from power, Diem was assassinated along with his brother Nhu. Madame Nhu was, at that time, on a tour of the United States giving speeches in support of Vietnam's war against Communism. When hearing of the event and the rumored involvement of the United States she said, "Whoever has the Americans as allies does not need enemies". She went on to predict a dark future for her country, which was sadly to prove all too acurate. With Diem gone, the U.S. was firmly in control of the Vietnam conflict and Madame Nhu retired from public life to Italy.

To All Readers

A bit of a milestone for this new blog site has passed today and I want all readers, members and subscribers to know I appreciate your taking the time to read this diverse collection of rants and ramblings. I want everyone to know I do appreciate it. Of course, I have a self-destructive streak, so I will give a warning that in some future posts I will be diving into my thoughts on the roots of revolutionary republicanism. So, along with my thanks, consider this your last call -next stop: crazytown! Anyway, I thank you all, I am grateful to all, newcomers and those who've been around a while and I am ... The Mad Monarchist.

General Order No. 15: A Past Monarchist Manifesto

ORDER

To Russian detachments in the territory of Soviet Siberia

No 15 given at Urga, May 21st, 1921

I, Lieutenant General Baron von Ungern-Sternberg, commanding the Asiatic Cavalry Division, bring the following to the notice of all Russian units ready to fight the Reds in Russia.

Russia was formed gradually out of various elements, few in number, which were welded together by unity in faith, by racial relationship, and, later, by similarity in government. So long as she was untouched by the principles of revolutionary thought, which are inapplicable to her owing to her composition and her character, Russia remained a powerful, indissoluble empire.

The revolutionary storm in the West profoundly undermined the mechanism of the State by detaching the intellectuals from the mainstream of national ideas and aspirations. Led by the intelligentsia, both political-social and liberal-bureaucratic, the people -though in the depths of their hearts they remained loyal to Tsar, Faith and Fatherland- started straying from the narrow path laid down by the whole development of national thought and life…revolutionary thought flattered the vanity of the mob, but it did not teach the people the first principles of freedom or construction…the crowd is a barbarian, and acts as such on every occasion. As soon as the mob has secured freedom it speedily turns into anarchy, in itself the height of barbarism…

First the year of 1905, and afterwards 1916-1917, witnessed the criminal, horrible harvest of the seed sown by the revolutionaries…Three months of revolutionary license sufficed to destroy what many centuries had achieved…The people feel the need of a man whose name is familiar to them, whom they can love and respect. Only one such man exists; the man who is by right lord of the Russian earth, THE EMPEROR OF ALL THE RUSSIAS, MICHAEL ALEXANDEROVICH…In the course of the struggle against the criminals who have destroyed and profaned Russia, it must be remembered that, on account of the complete depravation of morals and the absolute licentiousness, intellectual and physical, which now prevail in Russia, it is no longer possible to retain our old standard of values. ‘Truth and mercy’ are no longer admissible. Henceforth there can only be ‘truth and merciless hardness’. The evil which has fallen upon the land, with the object of destroying the divine principle in the human soul, must be extirpated root and branch. Fury against the heads of the revolution, its devoted followers, must know no boundaries.

The Holy Prophet Daniel foretold of the cruel time when the corrupt and the unclean would be defeated and the days of peace would come: ‘And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. And from that time the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waited, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days’.

Prince Ends Presidential Run

According to the German media and his own website Prince Radu Duda of Romania has ended his bid to be the next President of the Romanian republic. Despite the endorsement of his father-in-law King Michael the Prince has attributed his decision to a lack of popular support for his campaign. According to polls no more than 12% of Romanians at most favored his effort to be their next president. Most people could see this coming and the real mystery is why he ever thought he had a chance in the first place with even many proud, patriotic monarchists having little enthusiasm for him. I can only see the little episode as damaging to the monarchial cause in Romania which would benefit greatly from a restoration under King Michael who is truly an able and admirable man. I am afriad this has hurt the RF's public image and leaves me rather gloomy as to the prospects under the next generation of royal leaders.