Chosen by birth rulers by the grace of God? Especially these days, it is worth remembering that the principles of ownership are at odds with everything that democratic societies stand for.
Only good things are said of the dead, and this principle should not be violated. Queen Elizabeth of England was undoubtedly a wonderful woman. But this is not about them.
It’s about monarchy, an ancient form of government that no one in democratic societies usually takes seriously, something about color magazines and gossip reports, and nothing more. However, after the death of Elizabeth, not only in Great Britain, but also in Germany, the British royal family and the monarchy itself were spoken of with extraordinary respect.
We should not forget that property violates a fundamental principle of democratic societies: equal rights for all. Of course, even in democracies, the sons of great professors, doctors, and businessmen have better chances than the sons and daughters of teachers, nurses, and junior employees. Opinions differ on whether and to what extent the state and society should become active in this issue. But it is clear to most people that there is inequality of opportunity here, as well as injustice. In any case, the principle applies: childbirth should not create privileges.
He seriously calls himself “King, thank God.”
For all the fascination with splendor and splendor, it is clear that the idea of hereditary property is based on myth and legend, one could also say on fiction. “Today, as has happened over a thousand years ago, the crown passes to our new king, our new head of state,” British Prime Minister Liz Truss said after the Queen’s death. “We give him our loyalty and dedication, just as his mother has done so much to so many people for so long.”
why? What qualifies Charles to be king? It cannot be explained rationally, even if every child knows the answer: it is his birth, and nothing else. Neither the people nor Parliament, but God decides who leads the nation. Thus the British king or queen is also head of the Church of England. Upon his coronation, Charles is anointed with sacred oil, and calls himself in all seriousness Charles III, by the grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and other worlds and lands, King, Defender of the Faith – meaning the king “by the grace of God” and “defender of faith”.
An anointed king of a secular country – that sounds ridiculous
Publisher Max Nordau wrote in his 1883 book The Traditional Lies of Civilized Mankind: “The kingdom is inextricably linked with religion.” A dictator can exercise his power by force, but once he wants to inherit his empire, he needs religious legitimacy. In a secular society like the British one, monarchy seems even more ridiculous. Only racists today believe that a person should be more valuable than others because of his birth – even royalists would probably reject such an idea. However, the monarchy and the aristocracy – abolished in Germany and largely deprived of power in Great Britain – are based precisely on this assumption.
When people watch a movie or read a book, they are usually not bothered by the fact that the stories presented there are fictional – they deliberately refrain from looking beyond the fictional facade. The English poet Coleridge called this the “voluntary suspension of infidelity.” What is logical and necessary in cinema and reading seems absurd when it comes to reality. You have to voluntarily refrain from questioning the monarchy until you can have faith in it.
In Great Britain, holding on to the royal family against all causes, holding on to the illusion of hereditary power, is an expression of inescapable poverty. “Queen Elizabeth II was the rock on which modern Britain was built,” said Liz Truss. “Because of you, Britain is the great country that it is today.” Although this is just a “traditional lie”, it shows how difficult it is for Britons to imagine their country without the unified monarchy. It also explains why 62 per cent of Britons want their country to remain a monarchy – compared to just 45 per cent in Scotland. It’s hard to beat the imagination. But sometimes, with all due respect to Elizabeth Windsor, one has to realize that they are just fantastic lies.