Absolutely. And when free to pursue and achieve, the cream will rise to the top. Along with the driven and unethical.

I offer you our Congress as proof that a representative democracy is only better than a monarchy because of its feedback mechanisms, i.e. the voters. Though the last election cycle demonstrates otherwise.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of monarchical forms of government. I just understand the motivations that lead to them. As for monarchy’s poor track record, ego is the great enemy of noblesse oblige.

I love that song from “Fiddler.” I have shouted the title with a Russian accent many times when my kids questioned why they had to get dressed and presentable for some function or another.

I’m all for tradition, custom and honor… when they are voluntary. Peerage, a caste system, the house of Lords, Dukes, Duchesses, Earls… Very un-American. Anti-American, actually.

Or perhaps this might be the answer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqFDzLbuPXU

(If it doesn’t quite convince, I suppose one can always try substituting… “INERTIA!”…)

Which is PRECISELY WHY Her Majesty’s Royal Physicians are doing their absolute darnedest to keep her alive (in light of who is he who is expected to follow)….
It does help that she has wonderful genes—from the maternal side….

Yes, she’s admirable indeed (her beloved corgis—i.e., those who are left—less so, perhaps), though the beloved, dashing, royal consort, while certainly heroic was more than a bit of a card and a loose-ish sort of canon if with a “bold” (some might say “refreshing”…IOW less than reverant, even buffoonish at times) sense of humor…but then more power to him(!)—though her latest jag about the need, before time runs out, to tackle global warming seemed quite a bit out of character, inappropriate and a bit too much, even shocking, for some…. (might one assume that SOMEONE must have put her up to it…most likely the “next in line”…?.)

The long and short of it is that for those who cherish the royals or merely respect the throne, ER II must be kept alive at all costs. (And she herself well knows it!)
– – – – – – – –
Regarding George III, some of you may have come across a heady, if sober— but fascinating—“reassessment” of the man and his policies that definitely goes against the grain and against the received wisdom of several centuries (in fact not a few would label it “revisionist”):
https://spectatorworld.com/topic/americans-misunderstand-king-george-iii/
(But a most worthwhile read…)
H/T Powerline blog.
File under: Now, Gods, stand up for…George III…!
…even if it might in any case bring to mind…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXWCaQPXE_0

I’m with you on the royals: Liz and Philip, William and Catherine, the late Queen Mum and George VI, all do or did their part with honor and dignity, that part being to be a symbol and rallying point that stands for the nation and above messy politics and trendy pop culture. Charles and Harry and Andrew and sundry other royals do not.

huxley, Art Deco —

I only briefly remember seeing him speak at Diana’s funeral (and boy howdy was he angry), but I always thought that Harry looked a lot like Diana’s brother. I think I look a lot more like my maternal uncle than my father, so this was not surprising to me.

Hereditary monarchies are what I loathe, and, again, the concept seems anathema to the very idea and principles of the United States. Men and women are born equals and should be free to pursue and achieve through personal industry, desire and ability.

No American should admire a system that requires one to bow or curtsy before another by dint of a surname.

Of living British royals I’ll agree that Elizabeth and William seem decent and picked competent spouses. That’s not a great batting average when you look at the rest of the current field and history doesn’t paint a rosier picture. A twist of fate and we could easily be in the 3rd or 4th decade of King Charles’ rein. God save the queen, indeed!

Whether it’s a religious leader (like Moses) or a military leader (like Washington) that gets the reins of a nation it is rare that he doesn’t engineer things so power stays with his lineage. To borrow your quote, that’s why the monarchical form of governance is the oldest. Incredibly, the United States of America broke that tradition over 200 years ago. It is no coincidence that what followed was the growth, development and expansion of the freest, most prosperous nation humanity has seen and most other nations now emulate that structure.

When Putin or Xi or the Kim family rewrite laws or reengineer elections to hold power we all seem to agree they are corrupt. Yet we cheer when the Windsors do it.

I do not get it.

“I’m talking about embarrassment as a pragmatic blow to one’s social position.”

I understand that, yet my assessment of Harris remains. Harris has repeatedly demonstrated a decided lack of the amount of self-awareness necessary to fully contemplate a “pragmatic blow to one’s social position”.

She’s a third rate political whore, who is willing to sell herself to whomever can advance her ambitions.

jon baker,

The ‘Nigerian Branch’ of the KKK… ROFLOL

Rufus T Firefly,

“Look at the Brits. For centuries have they supported an inbred, murderous family of frauds and larcenists because they hide behind the pomp and circumstance of ermine and horse drawn carriages.”

I but follow them distantly and only when they make the news but I think that you paint them with a bit too broad a brush and hold their ancestor’s behavior against them, when that was the norm.

I hold Prince Charles in contempt and Harry as well.

Whereas, Queen Elizabeth, her late departed consort husband Philip and Prince William and Duchess Catherine appear to have consistently conducted themselves with the dignity that their figurehead position requires. Nor as others here pointed out has inbreeding been a recent problem.

“I feel any educated American citizen should have derision (or at least a healthy skepticism) for royalty; inheritance by birthright. It is the opposite of our nation’s ideals.”

Until recently, America’s celebrities were our royalty. I would suggest that it’s how they conduct themselves that determines their worthiness for the position.

Human nature requires its heroes and princesses for they embody what we all wish we embodied. Horatius at the Bridge. Lionidas at Thermopylae. Gregory Peck’s Atticus Finch. Joan of Arc, Olivia de Havilland’s Maid Marian and Melanie in “Gone with the Wind”, Jean Simmons portrayal of Julie Maragon in “The Big Country”… it matters not whether an actor actually embodies those archetypes, what matters in the larger scheme of things is that the archetypes deeply resonate with humanity. And that’s why the monarchical form of governance is the oldest.

Good grief. Must you make your disagreements with others so personal and vicious?

Do you ever consider what exhibit you make of yourself?

You’re given to making an obnoxious exhibit of yourself and you fancy that’s normal. Real normies aren’t bothered by foreign heads of state or their relatives.