Monarchy Forum
Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 40 of 40     «   Prev   37   38   39   40
jovan66102

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,538
Reply with quote  #586 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonarchicWalrus

Ideally, I'd like to see the royal line of Hawai'i put in charge of the nation (since it is the closest thing to an American line that exists), although that is even more unlikely.



Just out of curiosity, why? Why would you want a family that has no racial, ethnic or linguistic ties to either the Native Peoples or the various immigrant groups making up the population of the US?


__________________
'Monarchy can easily be ‘debunked;' but watch the faces, mark the accents of the debunkers. These are the men whose tap-root in Eden has been cut: whom no rumour of the polyphony, the dance, can reach - men to whom pebbles laid in a row are more beautiful than an arch. Yet even if they desire equality, they cannot reach it. Where men are forbidden to honour a king they honour millionaires, athletes or film-stars instead: even famous prostitutes or gangsters. For spiritual nature, like bodily nature, will be served; deny it food and it will gobble poison.' C.S. Lewis God save Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, etc.! Vive le Très haut, très puissant et très excellent Prince, Louis XX, Par la grâce de Dieu, Roi de France et de Navarre, Roi Très-chrétien!
VivatReginaScottorum

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 298
Reply with quote  #587 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jovan66102
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonarchicWalrus
<p>Ideally, I'd like to see the royal line of Hawai'i put in charge of the nation (since it is the closest thing to an American line that exists), although <strong>that</strong> is even more unlikely.</p><p>
<br><br>Just out of curiosity, why? Why would you want a family that has no racial, ethnic or linguistic ties to either the Native Peoples or the various immigrant groupsI making up the population of the US?</p>

I agree with Jovan. I definitely would like to see Hawaii become independant under the former Hawaiian monarchy, but if the United States itself was to become a monarchy I'd say Queen Elizabeth II would be the rightful claimant as succesor of George III. I do agree with the Monarchic Walrus' (love the name, BTW) assessment of the situation in Mexico, though. Didn't Emperor Maximillian adopt the descedants of Mexio's previous Emperor (of the First Mexican Empire) as his own and grant them imperiak titles? If so, then their descendants would be the rightful Imperial Family whatever way you look at it.

__________________
That which concerns the mystery of the King's power is not lawful to be disputed; for that is to wade into the weakness of Princes, and to take away the mystical reverence that belongs unto them that sit in the throne of God. - James VI and I of England, Scotland and Ireland
MonarchicWalrus

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #588 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jovan66102

Just out of curiosity, why? Why would you want a family that has no racial, ethnic or linguistic ties to either the Native Peoples or the various immigrant groups making up the population of the US?

The Kawananakoas, ethnically speaking, have both Native Hawaiian blood and the blood of American Immigrants/Emigrants, so I see no problems there, as they are an ethnic mix (and, of course, there would be no perfect ethnic match for the melting pot nation). And, linguistically, all three of Hawaii's pretenders (Hawaiian succession is tricky...) speak American-English, so again I see no problem.

By contrast, there are three "alternatives" to going with the Hawaiian line that I see, and for reasons I shall explain, I do not see them as being as advantageous as using the Hawaiian line.

As VivatReginaScottorum notes, one alternative would be Queen Elizabeth II. However, as I am an Absolutist, I do not see any direct benefit from joining up with Britain's parliamentary system, since Her Majesty unfortunately wields little authority. Ultimately, I'd view it as a slight improvement, but unfortunately not much of one. If the authority and responsibility of the monarchy was restored in Great Britain, I would view things differently and might favor this approach. Another reason I do not favor this option is because, as Machiavelli puts it in The Prince, a monarch has great difficulty in maintaining control over a nation with a different culture, and American and British cultures have developed and evolved differently over the years. By contrast, Prince Quentin Kawananakoa is himself American, and has a history in American politics, and thus, is more likely to be accepted by an American populace as a leader (although, admittedly, getting them to accept any monarch would be quite a challenge, as the mindset here seems firmly republican).

The second possibility would be to do as some suggested after the Revolutionary War, and make George Washington's heir into an American King. Following this line, it appears that a man by the name of Paul Washington would be the "rightful" king of the United States. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/27075856/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/texan-george-washingtons-closest-kin/#.UTYyIRw3sQ0

However, as the above link shows, Paul Washington does not seem a good fit for a monarch, and based on the comments of some of his family members, it seems they are republicans and would not accept such a title.

The third, and I'll admit most likely to work realistically speaking, alternative would be to simply find a new king or queen to start a new royal line, or draw from existing European nobles, similar to how the Second Empire of Mexico selected their king. The main problem with this, of course, lies in the choosing of such a person.


__________________
"It is doubtful whether, in terms of effective powers and services, any king of even the seventeenth-century 'absolute monarchies' wielded the kind of authority that now inheres in the office of many a high-ranking official in the democracies."
-Bertrand de Joevenel, Sovereignty
jovan66102

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,538
Reply with quote  #589 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivatReginaScottorum
I agree with Jovan. I definitely would like to see Hawaii become independant under the former Hawaiian monarchy, but if the United States itself was to become a monarchy I'd say Queen Elizabeth II would be the rightful claimant as succesor of George III. I do agree with the Monarchic Walrus' (love the name, BTW) assessment of the situation in Mexico, though. Didn't Emperor Maximillian adopt the descedants of Mexio's previous Emperor (of the First Mexican Empire) as his own and grant them imperiak titles? If so, then their descendants would be the rightful Imperial Family whatever way you look at it.


Of course, you'll find people like me who would totally oppose any claims of Her Majesty to about two thirds of US territory, and I am her loyal Canadian subject. She has no claim or pretence to anything west of the Mississippi except for, possibly, a bit of the Oregon Territory. Louisiana Territory belongs to the French Crown (whoever that belongs to, tho' long term members know my feelings!) and the rest belongs to either the Spanish Crown or the Mexican Imperial Crown, depending on how far back you want to go. The one line that has no claim whatsoever (that's zilch, nada, nil, etc.) to the mainland US is the Hawai'ian House.

***ETA*** I forgot Alaska, eh? It belongs to the Romanovs, tho' I wish Lord Derby had been able to buy it for the Crown, instead of Seward buying it for the US.

__________________
'Monarchy can easily be ‘debunked;' but watch the faces, mark the accents of the debunkers. These are the men whose tap-root in Eden has been cut: whom no rumour of the polyphony, the dance, can reach - men to whom pebbles laid in a row are more beautiful than an arch. Yet even if they desire equality, they cannot reach it. Where men are forbidden to honour a king they honour millionaires, athletes or film-stars instead: even famous prostitutes or gangsters. For spiritual nature, like bodily nature, will be served; deny it food and it will gobble poison.' C.S. Lewis God save Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, etc.! Vive le Très haut, très puissant et très excellent Prince, Louis XX, Par la grâce de Dieu, Roi de France et de Navarre, Roi Très-chrétien!
KRJ

Registered:
Posts: 15
Reply with quote  #590 
Quote:
Originally Posted by royalcello
Do you cherish hopes--however remote--of the United States becoming a monarchy eventually?


Hope?  I'm not sure I would call it that.  I don't believe it's impossible but I think it's improbable until Yeshua the Messiah (Jesus the Christ if you prefer the Greek) returns in glory to take the throne in Jerusalem as KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.  Oh, what a glorious day that will be!

Quote:
Or perhaps breaking up into smaller countries, some of which might be monarchies?


I think that would take a national implosion, most likely caused by financial disaster, natural disaster or a combination of the two.  But of course that's looking more likely all the time.

Quote:
Or are you mainly interested in supporting monarchies and royalist movements in other countries with a stronger indigenous monarchical tradition?


That's mostly it.  I support monarchy because I believe it's the natural order of things from two perspectives.  From a Christian perspecitve I believe it's the God ordained order of things; that the Bible teaches the Divine Right of Kings.  But even if one insists on a secular humanist perspective I believe one can't help but see monarchy as the natrual order of things as a natural development from tribe and clan chieftans.

Quote:
I'm mostly in the latter category, though I would like to see Hawaii secede and restore the monarchy.


Agreed.

__________________
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
KRJ

Registered:
Posts: 15
Reply with quote  #591 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulblighter
Within the 50 States, I am only inclined to support monarchy in Hawaii and perhaps even a few sovereign Native territories ( it's been done in republics before, look at Panama).


Agreed, unless the something catastrophic happens like a national implosion due to financial and natural disaster. 

Quote:
However, I will support the republic of the United States of America and will not support a monarchy here save we get our own American Napoleon.


I believe only two men ever qualified as an American "Napoleon" of sorts: Washington and MacArthur.  Say what you want about their faults but they were both kingly.  Being presidential (in the usual US sense) is not the same thing. 

And I just mean general typology when I say, "of sorts."  I have not forgotten that Washington preceeded Napoleaon. 


__________________
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
KRJ

Registered:
Posts: 15
Reply with quote  #592 
Quote:
As VivatReginaScottorum notes, one alternative would be Queen Elizabeth II.


I am an admirer of HM Elizabeth II but think it unlikely this is workable.

Quote:
Another reason I do not favor this option is because, as Machiavelli puts it in The Prince, a monarch has great difficulty in maintaining control over a nation with a different culture, and American and British cultures have developed and evolved differently over the years.


And that's the reason I think it unworkable.

Quote:
The second possibility would be to do as some suggested after the Revolutionary War, and make George Washington's heir into an American King.


You're getting warmer.

Quote:
Following this line, it appears that a man by the name of Paul Washington would be the "rightful" king of the United States. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/27075856/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/texan-george-washingtons-closest-kin/#.UTYyIRw3sQ0


Assuming you follow the European rules of ascension and look for a pretender among the decendants of Augustine Washington.  I wouldn't.  I believe the pretender should be a decendant of George Custis.

Quote:
However, as the above link shows, Paul Washington does not seem a good fit for a monarch, and based on the comments of some of his family members, it seems they are republicans and would not accept such a title.


Solves the problem.  Back to George Custis.

Quote:
The third, and I'll admit most likely to work realistically speaking, alternative would be to simply find a new king or queen to start a new royal line, or draw from existing European nobles, similar to how the Second Empire of Mexico selected their king. The main problem with this, of course, lies in the choosing of such a person.


Given the typical American's fawning over politicians and celebrities, I fear we would have Hillary I or Oprah I.  Neither of which is worthy to to stand before HM Elizabeth II.

If Americans were to create royalty I believe the only natural choice, after Washington, was MacArthur. 

Missed our chance both times. 


__________________
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
Kaiser109

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 4
Reply with quote  #593 
The Chance of The USA becoming a monarchy is low the only north American country likely becoming a monarchy is Canada seeing it was originally and is rightfully British land but two your second question about parts of America becoming a crowned country is more likely if every state in America were to go independent but if they were to go independent just saying.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,742
Reply with quote  #594 
It seems to me that you're overlooking a minor point about Canada's present constitutional status.
Ethiomonarchist

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 5,103
Reply with quote  #595 
Yeah I was going to say... Canada IS a monarchy.
__________________
The Lion of Judah hath prevailed.

Ethiopia stretches her hands unto God (Quote from Psalm 68 which served as the Imperial Motto of the Ethiopian Empire)

"God and history shall remember your judgment." (Quote from Emperor Haile Selassie I's speech to the League of Nations to plead for assistance against the Italian Invasion, 1936.)
Queenslander

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 607
Reply with quote  #596 
How long for, depends on how long they want to put up with their boy Prime Minister, who has been a little 'lukewarm' in regards to matters concerning his Sovereign sadly, not like his predecessor whom it could be said was proper in his treatment of her and matters concerning her family during his time in office.
__________________
Yours Sincerely Queenslander
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.