tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post2666229277077166765..comments2023-11-03T07:23:30.909-05:00Comments on The Monarchist 2.0: You See, It's Called a Hereditary MonarchyUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-68536815974564453262007-12-31T17:30:00.000-05:002007-12-31T17:30:00.000-05:00It is a beautiful photo. To be honest I've always...It is a beautiful photo. To be honest I've always thought that no one looked better in official robes than Louis Mountbatten. Curzon may have been the best Viceroy India ever had but no one looked the part better that Mountbatten.Kiplinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04838567321326673782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-6790082961079303242007-12-31T00:18:00.000-05:002007-12-31T00:18:00.000-05:00Tell me you are not a monarchist when you look at ...Tell me you are not a monarchist when you look at this portrait photo. The garb and pomp is enough to burn any unceremonious republican with giant dollops of envy.Beaverbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957034620891207177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-48631345331225187652007-12-30T02:44:00.000-05:002007-12-30T02:44:00.000-05:00Roman Catholics may have been socially persecuted,...Roman Catholics may have been socially persecuted, but they still had their Rights as Englishmen. That is the one of the legacies of 1688. <BR/><BR/>No nation has tolerated minorities better and with greater equanimity than has England. To this day. <BR/><BR/>That is one of the centrally great things about "English liberty." <BR/><BR/>You could try and deny or refute this, but you can't. <BR/><BR/>I think the Prince of Wales will be a tremendous King - but given the genetic inheritance of Her Majesty, he is likely to be a very old King.Aeneas the Youngerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18235737108817968315noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-10222839222055866132007-12-30T00:37:00.000-05:002007-12-30T00:37:00.000-05:00I'm not a Jacobite so I happily concede the tide o...I'm not a Jacobite so I happily concede the tide of progress that brought about constitutional monarchy from its absolutist predecessor. But. 1688 was a coup d'etat that forcibly removed a non tyrannical monarch as a result of the anti-Catholic sentiment of the times, a King whose great crime was to grant freedom to non-Anglicans throughout England. It was a divided parliament that moved against James II, not the English masses rising up as was the case with the absolutist Charles I. As for English liberty, I suppose it depends on what side of the fence you were sitting on. Catholics were persecuted for their religion for the next 100 or so years as a result. But the revolution did give us the beginnings of parliamentary democracy and gave us a mechanism to freely choose and dispose of our governments.Beaverbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957034620891207177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-86175897472413040882007-12-29T23:51:00.000-05:002007-12-29T23:51:00.000-05:00Thanks Beaverbrook. I like the new picture. As f...Thanks Beaverbrook. I like the new picture. As for 1688, I'll have to respectfully disagree with your interpretation, rather than making the point myself I'll let Burke, who strongly belived in the hereditary principle too, do the talking (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1791burke.html):<BR/><BR/>"The third head of right, asserted by the pulpit of the Old Jewry, namely, the "right to form a government for ourselves," has, at least, as little countenance from anything done at the Revolution [of 1688- Ed.], either in precedent or principle, as the two first of their claims. The Revolution was made to preserve our ancient, indisputable laws and liberties, and that ancient constitution of government which is our only security for law and liberty."Kiplinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04838567321326673782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-46572063893128070342007-12-29T23:00:00.000-05:002007-12-29T23:00:00.000-05:00Hopefully by the time that William is the King, he...Hopefully by the time that William is the King, he's found an identity for himself that doesn't hinge on who is mother was.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05321133627941151860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-24932416909973717392007-12-29T22:37:00.000-05:002007-12-29T22:37:00.000-05:00I've been looking for an excuse to use this splend...I've been looking for an excuse to use this splendid photo of the heir to the throne, which you have now provided, Kip.<BR/><BR/>It is of course ridiculous to whimsically attempt to find the most popular person for the job - that's why we have politicians. This reminds me of the "Glorious Revolution" where a small cadre of Whig elites and disgruntled Tories deposed of James II from the throne for no other reason than he was a Catholic. For some, the hereditary principle can be a difficult thing.<BR/><BR/>By the way, I noticed that Professor David Flint of the ACM linked to your earlier post, and thought your comments well considered. So congratulations.<BR/><BR/>Here's <A HREF="http://www.norepublic.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1314&Itemid=1" REL="nofollow">the link</A>Beaverbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957034620891207177noreply@blogger.com