The Nation of Britain is a Monarchy. We have no finer example of a life lived in duty than that of the late Queen Elizabeth. We are subjects in Britain. That does not mean we are subjected, but that each is an individual and recognised as such. We do not suffer the anonymity of being a ‘citizen’.
The advantages of being part of a monarchy are numerous and manifold. This cannot be replicated. I have written extensively in my blogs of the difference between a leader who is born to it and those who are elected. The self interest of those who struggle to get ‘the top job’ often replaces the sense of duty to which one who is born to the role inevitably feels most acutely. The burden of such a role cannot be overstated.
But I wanted to address the question of an elected president, rather than to extol the virtues of a monarch. For a period a person is elected to rule the country as they see fit. We have so many examples from around the world that we need not focus on any one of them. For the duration of their tenure the president leads and guides the nation according to the values that he or she holds dear. Like all people they are limited by their own perspective and so will reinforce those values for the nation.
Suddenly another person is given the role and they act according to their own lights. When those values are the well-being of the people and the land all may be well. But when those values are guided by the notion that they hold all the power in the nation, then things become sour and bitter and, truth be told, very sad for the nation. Corruption usually becomes rife.
What constancy can there be when every so often a new hand is on the tiller. The nation lurches from one side to another.
And so to those republicans in Britain I say look before you leap. Look at what it is motivates you to deny the nation you were born into, to demand a different regime than that which has served us well for so long. More than 500 years before the discovery of America England became united. More than 100 years before France considered a revolution Britain tried it. The result was that they wished Cromwell to become the new king which he refused, but instead chose the title Lord Protector. Even France after its revolution, and the savagery attendant upon it, made Napoleon Bonaparte an Emperor.
I don’t wish to pretend that all monarchs share a sense of duty comparable to that demonstrated by the late Queen. There is no question that the Stuarts as a family were inveterate gamblers. This same failure was embodied once more in the Prince Regent who became King George the Fourth, a vain and pompous man. Faithless towards those who served him and indulgent of his whims. But the woman who followed him, Victoria, shone an entirely different light on monarchy and the role of a good monarch right across Europe.
It is false to believe that these are accidental happenings and that nations do not have a destiny of their own. It is this destiny which draws the best out of those given to govern them. It will be recalled that King George the Sixth was not destined to be king, but, due to the abdication of his brother for the cause of love, he stepped into the breach and lead the British people through the darkest times of World War Two. Such is the power of a Nation to draw the best from its people.
Put aside your jealousies of imagined wealth and luxury and try looking at what it is that drives people in positions of power. Then make your decision.