Monarchies or Republics?

One of the by-products of the intense media coverage surrounding the passing of Queen Elizabeth II has been an increase in discussions about the benefits of a constitutional monarchies in this age of republicanism. 

Many view monarchies as archaic institutions that should have disappeared in the last century as societies adopted liberal democratic constitutions and hereditary leadership went out of style in many countries.

In Latin America, the debate has been heated since republicanism is the modus vivendi in this part of the hemisphere. Indeed, most of my Latino friends have waxed eloquent about the benefits of an elected president over a hereditary, constitutional monarch.

They see monarchies as vestiges of colonial imperialism, and crowns such as the British as purveyors of death and destruction to the colonies conquered from the early 1500’s until the 20th century. They see monarchies as temples of entitlement, where one person is better than another by virtue of their parentage and heritage.

Many Latin Americans see Queen Elizabeth as a colonial mistress who sought to throw the invading Argentinean forces out of the Falklands when the Argentine dictator Leopoldo Gualtieri’s troops invaded the islands. In fact, it was the Thatcher government that pursued this war since the monarch has no power to declare or wage war. 

They see the late Belgium King Leopold II as a genocidal fanatic who oversaw the deaths of ten million Congolese when Belgium ruled that country. 

My question is, are they right?

Constitutional monarchies in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and Spain have seen the development of highly functional democratic societies and dynamic economies. Freedom of expression, freedom of choice, free elections, a free media, and a justice system that works well are hallmarks of these monarchies. These multicultural societies have learned to create a sense of consensus within and peaceful relations with their neighbors as a matter of course.

They have created economies that work, societies that create a basic social net that provides, overall, education and health services for all, and a level of acceptance in which majorities and minorities feel empowered. 

Are there injustices?

Indeed, there are, but no society is perfect. Poverty and racism exist in many of these countries and social welfare sometimes bypasses certain groups. In addition, class discrimination is part of the social fabric, although these are conditions that are also shared by republics such as France, Italy, Germany, and many Latin American countries.

But, overall, I believe that life in most constitutional monarchies is more comfortable than in some republics.

Many “republics” depend on military backing, repression of the press and of free speech, and almost absolutist presidents with complacent legislatures and pliant judicial systems.

Corruption and influence exist in all countries – republics and constitutional monarchies. These are elements of universal human nature that can only be contained by legal systems that are strong and free of influence and interference and judiciaries free from corruption.

One has only to view today’s United States to witness the fragility of democracy in a polarized world.

However, in constitutional monarchies, the basic institutions of democracy have proven to be sacrosanct and respected by all to date. This was evidenced during the highly divisive Brexit debate in the UK.

In constitutional monarchies, the monarch provides a level of governance above the political fray. The monarch, or his/her representative, acts in the name of the state and not the government, and is the guarantor of democratic institutions.

Monarchs are trained since birth to respect the separation of powers, to stay neutral in day-to-day politics, and to not demonstrate favoritism at any time.

This allows governments to run countries independent of interference if they respect the inviolability of institutions and the fundamental tenets of their constitutions.

No system is perfect, as I have noted above.

But constitutional monarchies have proven their worth in this day and age and they remain a viable option for democratic governance.

[email protected] 

Edición:Ana Ordaz