This will be a short rant, but I have to write it. There is no argument more insidious, more seemingly compelling, and more disgusting and repulsive on rational analysis, for the abolition of monarchy, most often in my experience(probably simply because I live in the Anglosphere and primarily speak English) the British Monarchy, and the establishment of a republican constitution than that a republican constitution “encourages aspiration” to the role of head of state. It is said that in a republic, anyone can be president. Often held up is the example of the 16th President of These United States, Abraham Lincoln. He is considered the empitome of the republican spirit. Born in a log cabin in Kentucky, he never went to school, and yet through his determination and political talent, he managed to become the Overlord of the “greatest nation on Earth.”
Needless to say, this blogger is not impressed. Now, don’t get me wrong, I think social mobility is a wonderful thing, in most cases. If this poor boy had grown up to be a successful lawyer, doctor, or author, I would think that that was a wonderful, inspiring story of a person who overcame adverse circumstances to make something of himself.
But that isn’t what happened. No, Abraham Lincoln grew up to be Overlord. And more importantly, he left us the legacy that anyone can be our Overlord. He left us a legacy of a culture where it is considered admirable for any and every little boy and now any and every little girl to aspire to be president of These United States. The head of a Tae Kwon Do organization I was once a member of has a habit of saying after every belt test that “You work hard, achieve a straight-A full-4-point, then, 30, 40, 50 years later, you grow up, take over the White House.” We have created a society where citizens are encouraged from the time they are children to seek political office and political power.
Why is this bad? Hans-Hermann Hoppe explained in his book(a great influence on my thought) Democracy: The God That Failed, but I’ll sum it up. The State, whether you believe it is necessary or not, is the only organ of legitimized theft and compulsion in society. Under other circumstances, those who covet other people’s property are made to feel ashamed of it and to repress their felonious desires. In a democracy, however, a public and “honorable” forum is provided for everyone to declare his desire for other people’s property and compete to have it realized!
Rather than, as before, limiting this power, at least in its ultimate form, that of head of state, to a fortunate few born into the right family and making it virtually impossible even for them to acquire the job by any efforts of their own, short of parricide, the job is now open to anyone, and tends to attract, not good and principled men, but unscrupulous demagogues and would-be thieves. These people, normally shamed and silenced, are now encouraged to pursue the acquisition, by force, of the property of others!
Yes, in a republic, anyone can aspire to be head of state. Anyone can aspire to become the Overlord through shameless manipulation and demagoguery. And thus those who are least honest and most desirous to use force to take the property of others without their consent will seek office. A fine system the republican has created!
Thus, even by supporters of a republic, “encouraging aspiration” to positions of political power must be held as a disadvantage rather than an advantage of the system. Aspiration to rule over others and have the right to appropriate what is theirs is not a positive thing to breed in our citizens and particularly in our children, and it creates a deeply covetous society, and what is worse, a society proud of its covetousness.
Comments are open, and I remain ever
Your Humble Servant,
Samuel C. Starrett
The Rambling Royalist