Weekend Link-Out: Monarchy Edition


MonarchyPat Buchanan’s recent praise of Vladimir Putin reminds many of us that Western-styled democracies/republics just might not be where the future is – which means we ought to be exploring other things. Monarchy, anyone?

– The “Introductory Statement” put out by the Constantine Society, an American Monarchist group

– Online, there seem to be two premier Monarchist blogs: The Mad Monarchist and The Alter and Throne

– An impressive collection of pro-Monarchy quotes, with an interesting range of sources: from Putin, to Churchill, to C.S. Lewis

– A very bad model for Monarchists

– Finally, a few different authors who can be found within the Alternative Right are Monarchists. William S. Lind of Lewrockwell.com and The American Conservative writes about his adoration for the Prussian Monarchy here. Charles A. Coulombe of Takimag writes in defense of Monarchy here. And Lee Walter Congdon, frequent speaker at the H.L. Mencken Club, talks about the matter here.

Have a happy New Year!


Robert Pinkerton

Mad Monarchist will only accept comments through facebook or other social networks of like ilk. Such social networks offend my taste, wherefore I decline to join any one and I enjoy Schadenfreude when they falter in any manner. Hence I cannot comment on that site.


Brilliant idea! Barack Obama–Mitt Romney–John McCain–George W. Bush–George Soros–Bill Gates as President for Life! We already have a bloated executive branch that is barely accountable to the other branches and even less accountable to the people. The fact that we have the opportunity to elect a new CEO every few years does not change the fact that we are dominated by executive discretion, which is cabined by bureaucrat/client interests. A dominant executive is the essence of monarchy. Elections are a limitation on our monarchy, to some relatively slight extent. Our Founders tried to balance the necessity of effective executive power with limitations of its scope, control by the other branches, and elections, as noted. We the people have acquiesced in the perversion of that design.

Perhaps monarchists fantasize about someone with their own values and desires and with unlimited power to put them into effect. That fantasy is unlikely to come to pass. Rather, rhetorical concessions to your values and desires will mask the intensification of your slavery. Just like under the 2-party monarchy we have.

Don’t ask for a human monarch until your culture and values are widespread enough to guarantee your king will share them. Of course, praying for the End of Time is another story–Thy kingdom come!

John Maelstrom

Thomas S. Monson.

Pope Francis

If not in name, they are in deed kings. As for culture and values being widespread enough, I suppose this is why the best monarchies were the smaller ones.


If you’re asking me, I haven’t looked in on them for many years. When I did I was not interested because its preoccupation with the most external features of past eras to me seemed perversely uncreative. Sort of like monarchism for some people? Purely external and therefore trivial? But maybe in intervening years SCA has become a vehicle for useful historical insight.


Meh… Actually a republic… like the Founders envisioned and not egalitarian democracy, would be preferable than a monarchy. A true republic, without universal suffrage, only male property owners could vote. A variation on the Terran Federation (republic) from the book Starship Troopers. Minus the multicultural stuff, of course. Republics must maintain a homogeneous culture to assure survival.

Your Majesty

Monarchy didn’t give us Barack Obama–Mitt Romney–John McCain–George W. Bush–George Soros–Bill Gates, republican democracy did! Within less than a century states were trying to get out of it and blacks were given the vote, while England was enjoying the Victorian era.

The great American experiment in national suicide should have taught us a lesson by 1865, but certainly by now.

God, return the king!

Thanks for this article, Mr. Cavanaugh.

Leave a Reply