5 ms·

I have a hard time imagining the monarch insisting on a joke. Not just Queen Elizabeth, but any hereditary monarch from the modern age. Monarchs retain author

I have a hard time imagining the monarch insisting on a joke. Not just Queen Elizabeth, but any hereditary monarch from the modern age. Monarchs retain authority because they're good at politics... RMS, not so much. That's not to say his political positions are wrong, just that the man is impolitic at times. Monarchs exert soft power pretty much constantly, with public appearances, knighthoods, and recognition of great deeds. They often end up as the most popular political figures of their republics. So while monarchs are a fossil species in modern governments (since WWI), they retain enough of the royal prerogative to exercise those paper rights it when it actually matters. I think we're all second-guessing RMS here because he's using the perogative in a situation where it truly doesn't matter.

mikekchar 9y ago
Case in point: In Japan Prime Minister Abe wanted to change the constitution to allow Japan to engage in external conflicts if allies were in danger. The emperor of Japan suddenly said, "I'm old, you know. I think I want to retire, but there is no constitutional law that will allow me to abdicate. Please write this law ASAP". Prime Minister Abe does not have resources to do both constitutional changes at the same time... The emperor of Japan is really awesome.
- oblio 9y ago
  I guess they learned from the last few times when military juntas took control of Japan and burned everything to the ground, in the end.
oblio 9y ago
> Monarchs [...] often end up as the most popular political figures of their republics. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I think there's something wrong with that statement :p
- sevensor 9y ago
  I'm going to... stick my neck out... and venture that republics have usually got rid of their monarchs.
  - labster 9y ago
    Har har, yeah, point taken, but many constitutional monarchies are de facto republics. The UK, Sweden, the Netherlands, Japan, Norway. I was trying to distinguish from the hereditary monarchies that aren't republican, like the People's Democratic Republic of Korea.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > Har har, yeah, point taken, but many constitutional monarchies are de facto republics. No, they are just representative democracies. Which aren't coextensive with republics: you can be either without being the other.

mikekchar 9y ago

Case in point: In Japan Prime Minister Abe wanted to change the constitution to allow Japan to engage in external conflicts if allies were in danger. The emperor of Japan suddenly said, "I'm old, you know. I think I want to retire, but there is no constitutional law that will allow me to abdicate. Please write this law ASAP". Prime Minister Abe does not have resources to do both constitutional changes at the same time... The emperor of Japan is really awesome.

oblio 9y ago
I guess they learned from the last few times when military juntas took control of Japan and burned everything to the ground, in the end.

oblio 9y ago

> Monarchs [...] often end up as the most popular political figures of their republics. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I think there's something wrong with that statement :p

sevensor 9y ago
I'm going to... stick my neck out... and venture that republics have usually got rid of their monarchs.
- labster 9y ago
  Har har, yeah, point taken, but many constitutional monarchies are de facto republics. The UK, Sweden, the Netherlands, Japan, Norway. I was trying to distinguish from the hereditary monarchies that aren't republican, like the People's Democratic Republic of Korea.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Har har, yeah, point taken, but many constitutional monarchies are de facto republics. No, they are just representative democracies. Which aren't coextensive with republics: you can be either without being the other.