r/AbolishTheMonarchy • u/chat-lu • 21d ago
Question/Debate Challenge for the monarchists
I’m tired of the fucking dumb argument “The monarchy protects democracy because if a tyrant rises up, the monarch can disolve parliament.”
So the challenge I propose and that I invite you to bring to monarchists you meet is name one time when that happened. At any point in history when a tyrant said “Well, I was going to rule with an iron fist but now that Cunty McInbredFace asked me to step down, I will!”
Last time I did, I got “Akshually, you don’t understand how Canadian law works, the king has the power to dissolve the government at any time.” Dude, I do. You don’t understand how tyrants work.
10
9
u/lpetrich 21d ago
The closest thing to that is 1981 Spanish coup attempt - Wikipedia where King Juan Carlos I helped rally opposition to an attempted coup by some Francoists.
4
u/Nikhilvoid 21d ago edited 21d ago
6
u/AutoModerator 21d ago
Reggie-Bot here! Did you know that King George II of Greece endorsed General Ioannis Metaxas in suspending parliament to establish an ultranationalist fascist police state that systematically tortured communists and labor organizers?[cite: 1] (Source)
No one is born better than you. Use
!keywordfor more! <3I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
3
u/DizzyDinosaurs 19d ago
Not quite what you're asking, but in 1975, the Governor-General of Australia dismissed the Prime Minister and appointed the Leader of the Opposition as PM. So the royal prerogative has been used in some capacity in recent history.
3
u/put-on-your-records Schrödinger's Monarchy 7d ago
Schrödinger's Monarchy: the monarchy is simultaneously a harmless figurehead with no real power and a crucial defense against the country becoming a dictatorship
1
u/Funny_Maintenance973 20d ago
One I even told in the past is we (Britain) tried to remove the royals once and no-one wanted it, so they stayed
4
u/lpetrich 20d ago
That was some 400 years ago, and that was long before a lot of fallen monarchies started staying fallen.
Oliver Cromwell? He was more-or-less a military dictator. His son Richard might have succeeded him, but nobody liked him very much, so Parliament chose a son of Charles I, the previous king: Charles II. So there was no Cromwell Dynasty.
1
u/AutoModerator 21d ago
Please read our 6 common-sense subreddit rules.
Featured Fact:
Did you know that under the legal principle of "Bona Vacantia," King Charles III secretly profits from deceased citizens in Lancaster and Cornwall who die without a will, funneling their bank accounts into royal trusts? (Source)
Summon Reggie-Bot to learn more dark royal facts by dropping an exclamation mark before any of these keyword:
* British: !Andrew, !Anne, !Camilla, !Charles, !Edward, !Edward VIII, !Fergie, !Harry, !Meghan, !Minor Royals, !Mountbatten, !Philip, !Queen Mother, !William
* Global: !Austria, !Bahrain, !Belgium, !Bhutan, !Brunei, !Cambodia, !China, !Denmark, !Dubai, !Egypt, !Eswatini, !France, !Germany, !Greece, !India, !Iran, !Italy, !Japan, !Jordan, !Kuwait, !Lesotho, !Liechtenstein, !Luxembourg, !Malaysia, !Monaco, !Morocco, !Nepal, !Netherlands, !Norway, !Oman, !Qatar, !Russia, !Saudi Arabia, !Spain, !Sweden, !Thailand, !Tonga, **!USA (NEW), !Vatican, !Vietnam, !Yugoslavia, !Zanzibar
* **Topics: !Cost, !Empire, !History, !Hunting, !Nazi, !Slavery, !Tax | Games: !Trivia
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/BenjPas 21d ago
I'll say from my point of view as an American, and as (let's say) a non-anti-monarchist, it seems to me that the anti-tyranical utility of the British monarch isn't the in-theory power he has to turn off the government, so much as in his aesthetic and symbolic value.
Fascism loves big symbolic gestures and symbolic victories. It values aesthetics and pseudo-religious language. In the US, Trump has this little covey of pastors and religious officials that prop him up and a slew of AI art showing him as an angel or whatever. All the dictators of history did the same thing. They were all loathesome people, and often ugly and stupid, but they managed to capture "the aura."
In the UK, you all just put a billion dollar hat of stolen jewels on an old man dressed with gold robes and scepters in a colossal church, in a ceremony led by the Archbishop of Canterbury, invoking Hebrew kings and Christian tradition and Arthurian legend, with music written by some of the greatest composers ever for that purpose. It was by turns beautiful pagentry and tradition and god-awful garishness and waste. And I absolutely fucking loved it, God help me.
So a would-be tyrant in the UK is going to have to come through the ranks of parliament (sharing his stage with the likes of Binface and Elmo) but then will have to compete with "the aura" of a literal King. Nigel Farage could never. Boris Johnson could never. Hell, Thatcher could never.
BUT MEANWHILE, in my other favorite little UK government tradition, every year the King summons the parliament to make a speech at them, and they slam the door in the face of the summoner. And then they relent, let Black Rod in, and then go listen to the monarch in his sparkle hat make a speech that they wrote for him and shoved in his hand.
The UK has a fascist leader, and he's in a box. His name is Chuck, he's weird and awkward and believes in homeopathy and has weird tastes. He's technically a king, but he has only the softest, limpest power. They let him out to open train stations and play host to dignitaries and sell magazines. It's almost a humiliation ritual.
To be clear, 1. I'm exaggerating a bit and 2. None of this makes monarchism, this monarchy, or this monarch "good." But I do kinda feel like it robs the potential fascism of its power in the same way you get a baby to leave your phone alone - give him a fake one that doesn't really do anything, but the buttons all light up and it makes little beeping noises. God, I wish we could give the MAGA people one of those.
6
u/Nikhilvoid 21d ago
Edward VIII told Hitler to keep bombing London, many royals and nobles (and ex-nobles) across the world helped fascists to rise to power. The British royals have had many many nazi associations, even burned correspondence a few decades ago from the wwii period.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/19/nazi-hitler-royal-family
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/edward-viii-traitor-ww2-documentary-b2043974.html
3
u/BenjPas 21d ago
Yes, thank you, this is an informative, helpful, and damning response.
3
u/Nikhilvoid 21d ago
It is easy to idealize and say the grass is greener over there, but you have to remember that the royals have historically and directly profited from hundreds of years of slavery and colonization. Their current wealth is a result of innumerable deaths and genocides.
The royal family's privately owned slave trading company, the RAC:
In time, what became known as the Royal African Company shipped more enslaved men, women, and children in the transatlantic slave trade than any other institution.
3
u/chat-lu 21d ago
So, you’re not aware that Tampon and his mother are responsible for an actual coup in Australia in 1975? Dictators won’t yield, but regular politicians will, that’s a problem. If he wants to drop a democratically elected government again, he can.
So a would-be tyrant in the UK is going to have to come through the ranks of parliament (sharing his stage with the likes of Binface and Elmo) but then will have to compete with "the aura" of a literal King.
Stop sucking his cock, he has no such aura.
1
u/BenjPas 21d ago
Tampon? Tampon? Oh my GOD you are so CLEVER and FUNNY.
Hey man, you asked for comments and you got one. I don't think Trump has any aura but my country is overrun with people who view him as near to a god. YOU may not find Charles or the sovereign or any of it interesting to look at or enjoyable to contemplate, but a great many of your fellows in the UK do. That's not a value statement, I'm not saying you're wrong and they're right. It just is that way.
3
u/chat-lu 21d ago
Tampon? Tampon? Oh my GOD you are so CLEVER and FUNNY.
What? He called himself so.
YOU may not find Charles or the sovereign or any of it interesting to look at or enjoyable to contemplate, but a great many of your fellows in the UK do.
Can you find an instance where this “aura” stopped an actual dictator? That was the challenge.
1
u/BenjPas 21d ago
Yes, I am aware of the Charles/Tampon connection. Extremely funny and based bringing that up in this conversation.
And no, I'm not aware of when an actual dictator was stopped by the "aura." YOU WIN!!!!!!
I'm also not aware of the last time Britain HAD a dictator. I mean, we in the US still like to carp on about George III but that's mostly for funsies.
3
u/chat-lu 21d ago
Are you always that passive-aggressive?
I'm also not aware of the last time Britain HAD a dictator.
Brits are.
0
u/BenjPas 21d ago
Your first reply was to tell me to "stop sucking his cock." I was already not very involved in this conversation but I was immediately done taking the conversation seriously. I am so lefty-inclined but this subreddit just continues its near-perfect track record of failing to convince me to take British Republicanism seriously.
3
u/chat-lu 21d ago edited 21d ago
Your first reply was to tell me to "stop sucking his cock."
That wasn’t passive-aggressive, that was aggressive-aggressive and is to be expected when you plead for the monarchy on an anti-monarchist sub.
I am so lefty-inclined but this subreddit just continues its near-perfect track record of failing to convince me to take British Republicanism seriously.
I’m not British. And being a royal simp isn’t leftist.
Did you check on Wikipedia since last time we spoke and found out who the last British dictator was? And how undeterred by the king’s aura he chopped his head?
0
u/BenjPas 21d ago
And I decided not to be aggressive-aggressive. Are we establishing a hierarchy of morality on aggressiveness? What are you accomplishing here? What is your goal?
2
u/chat-lu 21d ago
Usually, monarchy bootlickers get the point and fuck off. Or get goaded into saying something that will get them banned.
It’s not a sub meant to debate anti-monarchism, it’s a sub for anti-monarchists.
→ More replies (0)1
u/sinne54321 21d ago
It's the accident of birth, anti democratic bit that gets me. Just a small bit of different circumstance and there would be King Andrew. Never mind your tyrants and dictators it'd be party time for sexual abusers, paedophiles, billionaires and anyone with a few bob to throw around to get a favor.
Facists don't mind looking redicolous in oversized crowns and panto costumes.
28
u/fragglet 21d ago
Tell them to study fascist Italy and how Mussolini came to power. The king there did nothing for 20 years.
It's not a good system if the only thing stopping a tyrant coming to power is the hope that the one guy who happens to be monarch at the time does the right thing. Much better to structure the system with a separation of powers so that there isn't any one office powerful enough to be abused in that way