Why I Changed My View on the Monarchy

I am writing this post the day after the arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor for "misconduct in public office".  What does this mean for the future of monarchy in Britain?

The monarchy is one of those issues where supporters of positive patriotism may disagree.  For some, loyalty to the monarch is an important element of patriotism.  For others, it is an anachronism, which should be replaced by a republic.  You may love your country and hold either view.

My own view has changed over the years.  In the past, I would have supported a republic, but I have come to see some advantages to constitutional monarchy, which are becoming more important in today's world.  That belief is conditional on the behaviour of monarchs, particularly their respect for the rule of law.  I might be writing a very different article if King Andrew was reigning over us.

In How to Be a Patriot, Sunder Katwala makes the case for positive patriotism in England (I may return to that in a later post).  Like me, he has changed his view on the monarchy because, he argues, the monarchy can provide a symbol of national unity for an increasingly diverse population, at a time when powerful forces are trying to divide us.

I agree with that, but I would explain my view slightly differently.  Look at countries which have slid into dictatorship.  Look at democracies which have elected populist "strongman" leaders, like Donald Trump or Victor Orban, who are eroding democracy and the rule of law.  Look at how their supporters react to their crimes or misdemeanours.  Why would anyone continue to support a leader with this record of indictments and convictions? That is difficult for outsiders to understand, but Americans elected Trump knowing all that, and millions continue to support him, whatever he does.

Why is that? This brief article in Psychology Today summarises some the psychology behind it.  For differing reasons, many people feel the need to place their faith in a strong leader.  We might wish they were more sceptical, more wary of blind faith, but good luck if you think you can change them.

The strongest argument in favour of constitutional monarchy is that it diverts some of that atavistic faith towards a figurehead who has no power.  That makes it more difficult for a dictator, or a wannabe dictator, like Trump or Orban, to take control.  Compare the blind faith of Trump supporters with the attitudes of British voters towards their politicians.  Why did no-one try to storm the House of Commons when Boris Johnson was removed from office? 

The tradition of monarchs appointing the prime minister may seem anachronistic.  It is the modern equivalent of popes or archbishops crowning medieval monarchs.  It conveys legitimacy, which may be revoked.  A similar point applies to the armed forces - they swear their allegiance to the monarch, not to a politician or political authority.

There are two strands to this argument:

1. A monarch diverts the blind faith of people who might otherwise place it in a strongman leader
2. In extreme circumstances, a monarch may intervene to protect democracy from a would-be dictator or a military coup

Point 1 may apply even if the monarch is a buffoon - providing he exercises no power.  Point 2 depends on the commitment of the monarch to democracy and the rule of law.  No system is incorruptible.  In pre-war Italy the King largely supported Mussolini, whereas in Spain in 1981, the King's intervention on television saved a young democracy from a military coup.

All of that explains why my support for the monarchy is conditional.  If the monarch considers himself, and his family, to be above the law, then advantage number 2 may not apply.  So the behaviour of King Charles towards his arrested brother is of critical importance.  So far, he seems to have made the right decisions, and I sympathise with anyone whose family members let them down so badly.

Some people have argued that Andrew is the product of hereditary privilege - indefensible in the modern world.  I tend to agree.  In a perfect world, it would not exist.  In a perfect world, millions of people would never place blind faith in a leader, but we do not live in such a world.  In Britain today, I believe we are better off with King Charles than President Trump - or Farage.