Saturday, February 4, 2012

Royal News Roundup

Starting with the House of Windsor, HRH the Duke of Cambridge started a six week tour of duty this week on the South Atlantic British base on the Falkland Islands which has brought to the forefront of the news the growing tensions between the U.K. and Argentina over the islands. This is nothing new of course but the arrival of Prince William has simply caused the media to pay attention to what has been going on for some time -it was not, I repeat, NOT prompted by his arrival on the islands. If anything the upswing in rhetoric over the old dispute flared up some time ago when it was first suggested that large oil deposits might exist in the territorial waters of the islands. The Argentine press has taken to mockingly referring to the Duke as “William the Conqueror”. Argentina has recently increased their rhetoric demanding the islands be turned over to them, though they insist this will be done peacefully through international organizations. However, when certain British officials said that Argentina was simply trying to arouse nationalist sentiments to distract the Argentine people from an ailing economy, Argentine officials said the British attitude was “increasing the risk of more wars” -which is about as close as Argentina has come to suggesting they would actually fight for the islands. As we all know, in 1982 Argentine military forces invaded the islands only to be evicted by the British a short time later. So far there has been nothing worse than name calling going on with Argentine President Cristina Kirchner referring to Great Britain and David Cameron in terms most would consider beneath the dignity of a head of state -even a republic.

A potential tragedy was averted for the House of Savoy. In Italy it was recently announced that Prince Emanuele Filiberto of Venice and Piedmont underwent surgery not so long ago to remove a cancerous tumor from his nasal septum. Late last year apparently the son of Prince Vittorio Emanuele of Naples, grandson of the late King Umberto II of Italy, noticed his voice was sounding different and at the urging of his wife Princess Clotilde went to see a doctor. The news came back that he had cancer. Fortunately, so far, it seems they got to it in time, the surgery was successful and the Prince is cancer free. To one faction of Italian monarchists, the Prince of Venice is heir to the would-be throne as the son of the only son (who according to them should be King Vittorio Emanuele IV) of the last king. The other faction recognizes the Duke of Aosta as the legitimate claimant due to an unequal marriage on the part of the Prince of Naples (though of course each side has other reasons). The Duke of Aosta has certainly led a more traditional life and been more involved with the memory of the late monarchy and so on. However, few people even in Italy knows who he is whereas Prince Emanuele Filiberto, because of recent appearances on reality TV, is well known in Italy and actually quite popular. So far that has not translated into support for a royal restoration. The offspring of Italy’s last King were required to renounce monarchism and swear allegiance to the republic in order to return to their homeland though even the “celebrity” Prince of Venice has commented on the benefits monarchies provide which republics cannot.

On Thursday, in the Netherlands, TRH the Prince and Princess of Orange celebrated their tenth wedding anniversary. The couple met in Spain in 1999 and soon began keeping steady company. In 2002 they were married, not without some controversy due to the family ties of the bride (all rather silly if you ask me) and ten years later they are still going strong, the proud parents of three daughters. There have been numerous events, special reports and documentaries on the royal couple this week in honor of this occasion. There has also been talk that HM Queen Beatrix may soon abdicate, but personally I cannot see that happening any time in the very near future (though I could be wrong of course). When that day does come, Prince Willem-Alexander will be the first King of the Netherlands since the death of King Willem III in 1890. Prince Willem-Alexander and Princess Maxima have both done a lot of good work during their time together, each have been very active and “hands-on” royals and they still seem as happy as they did 10 years ago. The time has flown by, I cannot believe it was 10 years ago that I was watching everyone in the Netherlands go nuts over the event, the whole country draped in orange, people wearing orange wigs, over-sized orange crowns and even the working girls of the red light district switched to orange light bulbs for the occasion. Only the Dutch. The Mad Monarchist sends the happy couple heartfelt congratulations on the occasion of such a milestone. Long live the Queen and long live the future King and Queen!

Finally, I wanted to say a few words about something not directly royal-related in the news this week but I think it is at least indirectly related and that is the election returns in Egypt. The two biggest winners were the Muslim Brotherhood (who are seen as being pretty bad in the non-Islamic world) and the Salafis (who are seen as being even worse in the non-Islamic world). Both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafis seem to want the same thing, the Salafis are just more blatant about wanting to use jihad to get it. Personally, I dislike this turn of events as I would have disliked any outcome other than a restoration of the Kingdom of Egypt. What prompted me to address this subject though is the reaction of so many in the media that, even now, democracy is still the answer, democracy is the cure-all and the way to stop these sorts of groups from gaining power is more democracy. Well, pardon me as I scoff, but isn’t it democracy that just now brought these groups to power? It amazes me that even those people who view the MB and the Salafis as evil can see them use the democratic process to gain power and still remain adamant that more democratic republics will solve the problem. Moreover, things look to be going in the same direction in Libya, Tunisia and other countries. I will not stop saying it because it remains true: monarchy is the answer. Like most religions, Islam endorses monarchy and leaves no room for republicanism. A monarch would also provide a check against extreme elements that would harm others and bring harm on themselves as a consequence. Instead of starting from scratch, when the illegal and illegitimate republican regimes in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt fell these countries should have reverted to their former monarchies and then gone from there in addressing what changes needed to be made. More republics will only make things worse, not better and comparing the monarchies and the republics of the Islamic world should leave no room for doubt as to which is the preferable system.


  1. Libya's one and only King - Idris -
    was a superlative leader: pious and wise.
    He was the head of the Senussi Sufi Order
    and thus had a dual appeal to his people :
    spiritual charisma and powerful political authority.

    Of course, the U.S. mainstream media NEVER
    mentions this admirable past ruler of Libya.
    His era was not even very long ago [it ended
    summarily by Qaddafi's coup in 1969, so they
    have NO excuse!]

    The corporate media's aim was to indoctrinate the public to equate Libya with
    crazy dictators.

    Apparently successfully too : few Americans even THINK to inquire :
    who was ruling there BEFORE this recent era?

    In fact King Idris provided enlightened
    leadership ; but the press does not want
    any Westerners to imagine that a monarch
    SHOULD come back to Libya.

    So his reign is carefully covered up.
    I researched a bit into Libya's national war of
    liberation from heavy-handed Italian colonists,
    and was so impressed by King Idris' record.
    Along with Omar Muktar, they were both
    superb defenders of their country.
    [Look at wikiepedia and see how that part
    is totally minimzed...]

    Few Westerners have ever heard of Omar Muktar, either,
    but he was a great hero for the entire Muslim world to this very day.

    The one GOOD aspect of the wikipedia article is the mention that some Libyan activists last year were
    seemingly calling for the return of
    this dynasty because
    they carried pictures of the deposed King,
    and waved the Royal flag of King Idris.
    Pretty significant, in my opinion.
    Not to be found in all the masses of
    carefully controlled coverage !

    You are quite right about Islam endorsing
    monarchs. After all, the Ottomans were regarded
    as almost divine by the rest of the Sunnis
    in the entire Middle East and stretching as far as the great center of high civilization, Bokhara [also spelled : Bukhara] in Turkestan.

    Serious Muslims don't believe in elections
    for democratic regimes. Observant Muslims
    refuse to participate, because they disapprove
    of the elevation of a man-made system, which completely tramples the wishes of the Almighty.

    Regarding media blackout regarding a restoration of Libyan Royalty, well, that's why
    MadMonarchist's observations are so
    No one else outside Libya has been thinking about this !
    Let's pray for the right rulers to
    take over Tripoli.

    I am quite concerned about the potential for
    mass tourism if a Western "democracy" takes shape. British newspapers have already been
    rhapsodizing about this.

    Today is the 1801-th anniversary of the death
    of Emperor Septimius Severus, born at Leptis Magna in 145 A.D., the unparalleled ruins of which would be ---ruined --- in a trice by the
    invasion of busloads of insensitive Western tour groups.

    Whereas, a King would be proud of the country's great archeological heritage
    and intelligently control the numbers of foreigners visiting Libya
    Democracies never care, being conscious of

    1. Just like how the tourists mock Versailles.

      These people keep complaining that there governments are broken yet they still don't look at the benefits of monarchy.

    2. The silence regarding the Libyan monarchy is deafening. Certain western countries may be embarassed by the truth, after all, King Idris had allied with the British and Americans during World War II against the Italians and he was always friendly with the US and UK afterwards only to have the west leave him hanging out to dry when trouble arose. I have also mentioned here before the disgusting hypocrisy of Gaddhafi who claimed that King Idris was enriching himself on the oil wealth of the country while the common people remained in poverty. This was not true of course, as the Libyan Royal Family had almost nothing when they were driven into exile, but that is exactly what Gaddhafi himself did and that, combined with the wealth he was able to extort from other countries, allowed him to live a far, (FAR) more lavish lifestyle than any Senussi prince had ever dreamed of.

      I'm also in complete agreement on the tourism front. The example that always comes to my mind is the Forbidden City in Hue, Vietnam. It is just disgusting to see the once sacred trampled on by hordes of vulgar, gum-popping tourists, making a mockery of what was once the revered sanctuary of the "Son of Heaven".

  2. I think the real reason that we see the Kings ignored is the same as wy we see the Muslim Brotherhood wins seen as a threat to Democracy. In peopels minds, Democracy is always good, and Monarhcy is always bad. Democracy is the onlyvalid form of Government and always leads ot Greater Freedom and a Western Style civilisation, and is brought about by Brave Freedom Fighters who overturn evil Dictators. The narrative is so storngly imbedded that no one questiosn it, so when the peopel vote for the Msulim Brotherhood, peopel think it can't be Democratic as it doens't fit the narrative. They ignroe the reality that simply letting peopelVote doens't automatically mean they will vote for Western liberal Values. They don't bothr with the Kigns at all, they are just too alein.

  3. Regarding restoration of Monarchy in my country,Egypt,I share you of hoping restoration of the kingdom of Egypt but I'm sorry to tell you that the chances are almost zero.After jan,25 revolution many options regarding the suitable political regime for Egypt have been discussed but the restoration of Monarchy wasn't among these options.Personally,I just think If King Ahmed Fouad had introduced himself to egyptian people,who almost don't know anything about him,He would have had a chance esp.among liberalists who at this moment,against the military regime lasting fromm 1952 whom they think want to continue the tradition from 1952 of military head of state.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...