Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Comments & Company Policy
Having been reluctantly obliged to delete several comments & links within the last week I thought it appropriate to lay out some of the basic policies of The Mad Monarchist in case anyone has missed the trend. The paramount issue behind most of these has been plain and simple bigotry. Whether religious, ethnic or national such talk will not be tolerated here. Policies, actions, individuals even and actual events can be bad or evil but there the list ends. Why so strict? I am a pan-monarchist and the backbone "theme" of this blog is pan-monarchism and regardless of my own feelings I will not tolerate comments or give webspace to anything which encourages hatred between monarchists regardless of their religion or nationality. I recently had to deal with a carpet-bombing campaign across my web dominions of anti-Catholicism. I have featured monarchs, monarchies and monarchists on this blog who were Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, Shinto and Buddhist to name a few. Anyone who can refrain from making negative or inflamatory comments about one can do so for the rest or they can take a hike. On the other side there was a derogatory comment about the former Kingdom of Tibet that had to be deleted which came from a professed Catholic. This little advisory is not meant to squelch criticism (as any reader of this blog should know) but blanket insults against entire religions, ethnic groups or nations will not be allowed. Be outraged, be vicious if you like, but be specific and remember that this is a monarchist blog so if you bash a monarchy don't be surprised if your comment never appears. Also keep in mind that it is a pan-monarchist blog and monarchists need to attract supporters not drive them away with prejudice. I'll leave it there for now but will of course answer any questions anyone might have. I am trying to be fair, not trying to be nice but remember I am often angry, always deranged and I am - The Mad Monarchist.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
A magnanimous policy, Mad Monarchist. I'm not very keen on the ecumenical/interfaith movement, as it tends to presume a denial of unique claims on each party's behalf and thus relativizes the truth. Nonetheless, I will stand in the forefront of those who will defend anyone of any culture--Christian or not--who will contest their right to practice their ancient traditions (so long as they are not inhumane, like cannibalism) and so resist assimilation into the charmless, globalized McCulture of today. And prominent among these is the issue of government and monarchy. Those of us who have lost this great boon in the West ought to be quite sympathetic to those elsewhere who have been forcibly republicanized.ReplyDelete
I'm not actually a big fan of "ecuminism" either, at least how it works these days: watering down what one side believes in an effort to make nice with someone else. However, I think atheism and secularism are the bigger global threat and I would prefer anyone who recognizes the reality of the divine over godlessness. Of course that does not mean one cannot criticize *specific* actions by certain groups (be it cannibalism or suicide bombers). Being the diehard reactionary that I am I recognize the odds stacked against my way of thinking and for that reason I say unite on what we agree on, don't dwell on divisive issues or playing the blame game. Desperate times mean monarchists of all people should not be *so* picky. It has happened more often than I care to remember that monarchists have lost and republicans won because the monarchists were either a) divided amongst themselves more harshly than against the revolutionaries, b) couldn't get everything they wanted immediately and so got nothing -ever or c) ignored the real threats against them while charging at straw men.ReplyDelete
Besides, as I see it, why make hateful comments about different religions, different peoples or countries when there are so many radicals & revolutionaries to make hateful comments about?
Mad Monarchist wrote: "It has happened more often than I care to remember that monarchists have lost and republicans won because the monarchists were either a) divided amongst themselves more harshly than against the revolutionaries, b) couldn't get everything they wanted immediately and so got nothing - ever or c) ignored the real threats against them while charging at straw men."ReplyDelete
"'Tis true, 'tis pity, and pity 'tis, 'tis true." MM's policy seems an eminently sensible one. As a Catholic myself I'm very sorry if any of my co-religionists has violated this policy.
One of the really annoying things about the religion-related comments were that the one directed against Tibet was basically someone trying to make his side look better by tearing down another -and that's just not necessary or helpful. The other was someone who just hates the Papacy to which my policy (for this board) is that even if a monarchist disagrees with the religion of the Pope they should at least be respectful (hopefully even supportive) of him as a monarch. Same would apply to the Aga Khan, the Dalai Lama or the Supreme Governor of the C of E who happens to be the British monarch as well.ReplyDelete
Good point about the Papacy's monarchical angle. Shades of (the non-Catholic) Lord Macaulay's famous essay on Leopold von Ranke's History of the Popes.ReplyDelete
I suppose I was particularly annoyed as the comment in question was attached to the post on Pope Pius VII, a man who brought down the wrath of Napoleon (ruler of a still officially Catholic country) because he refused to participate in the continental blockade against officially Protestant Great Britain. Eventually, in turn, the Protestant Brits supported the restoration of the Pope as monarch of the Papal States. Should be a time for inter-denominational agreement rather than taking a swipe at someone.ReplyDelete