32
Monarchists: can you explain the appeal?
(crazypeople.online)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2026
32 points (97.1% liked)
Ask Lemmy
39891 readers
989 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Monarchs don't just look to the next election or next year's economic growth.
Their frame of reference goes back for centuries and they have a personal interest in keeping the country functional and prosperous for the next centuries.
So as long as they don't wield too much executive power that isn't democratically legitimized, they can act as a counterweight to the parliament that's often dominated by party politics.
Edit:
Stay classy, folks and folkettes.
Thank you. The appeal of stability makes sense.
I really hope this doesn't sound like arguing, but you mention "they have a personal interest in keeping the country functional and prosperous for the next centuries". That made me think of places or eras where they got taxes or "rent" from the citizens. I guess this means the citizens accept this as the price?
I personally don't know of any country where the royalty gets tax money directly.
But I'm not an expert.
They do usually own lots of land which creates income that would go to the state instead, if they abolished the monarchy and nationalized their property.
Would it be fair to say that the income they have from their position (i.e income from land) is seen as fairly derived and a fair amount?
I wouldn't call it fairly derived.
It's all inherited from people who have stolen the land by pointing sharp sticks at its former owners.
Some Brits say it's a fair amount, since supposedly the monarchy draws in more money from tourism than it costs.
No idea, really. In Germany we abolished the monarchy but let them keep their lands, so we have the worst of both worlds.
And it's even worse with the church: Their real estate was nationalized in 1803, and the state agreed to pay reparations for it, perpetually. So now they get hundreds of millions of € per year from the state, and that's been going on for 223 years with no end in sight.
Though for that long term ruling-long term thinking, and only out for next election. It doesnt need monarchy.
May i introduce you the venetian republic!