Without over-complicating things, why do you believe what you believe? Please know that this isn't meant as mean-spirited, or sarcastic: I'm honestly curious about this. I find Monarchist ideology and the history behind it to be very interesting, but, I'm not too keen to suddenly turn around my whole political viewpoint without a thoroughly convincing argument.
Right, a full week without a response... I'm going to consider this thread a lost cause...
Social groups are the hinterland of TWC society. Far far away, this small rural community meet acouple of times a year to discuss in the Great Thing, but since there are no notification for you message, one rearly see others here. Too bad really. When it comes to your question, then it's because the monarchy is the one true anchor left in the political world. One leader, with his family follow no petty conflicts to embeace short turm fame or scuables. They mirror the same effect the legislature highest officials, the supreme court judges, but the monarchy has an even high tenure, life. After WW2, a powerful Norwegian politician Trygve Lie (Labour Party), who also was the foreign minister during the war adressed the Norwegian Merchant Fleet's war-sailors, that they would not be forgotten like WW1. He said that the money the sailors had earned in the service for the western world's freedom would be paid, unlike their WW1-fund. As a true politician, he down right lied and only a coulple of 100 sailors out of many tens of thousends ever recived their pay. The rest of the thousends of sailors who gave their life and sanity for the flag, the country and king were given nothing of their saved up wages. When the war was over, only the military privates recived fame and glory in the Norwegian main streets, media and citys. The sailors who have provided more then 1/3 of the allied resources to fuel their war was forgotten. Some were even ridiculed as traitors after the supreme court of post-war Norway gave away their favour in court when trying to sue the state for clean robbery. Forgotten on the cold harbours of Norway, many died, the rest suffered from depression, and only a few hard souls survived later on. Even the forman of their Sailor organisation was a judas as any other politician. He completly sold out the sailors when he spoke on the Norwegian Parliment floor: that the sailors-fund should not be paid out to them. King Haakon, who had his eduction in the Naval academy, graduated to Leutainant and was on many executions in his early days was the only consoliation. He praised the Sailors effort many times, until he suffered an accident and fell into depression and grew weak and old. Later a large memorial was buildt in their memory, and with a prominant man in the back, some weterans later sort out a deal were 30$ a month, far below their earnings was bestowed to the remaining sailors decades after. The money left was worth far less. No rents, and this was without the added taxes by the government. A slap in the face. During the war - When the traitor Quisling ordered all Norwegian merchant ships to return to occupied Norway or a "neutral" harbour, all the individual Norwegian captains ignored the call, and set sail to England, the allies and the King. They had the most advanced ships in the world at the time, and was the 4th biggest merchant fleet in the world. Without their effort, Briton could not have transport fuel from their colonies. Or canons, veichles, refined oil, food and all the other supplies from US Briton need to resist the Germans. No spitfires nor Lancaster would rule the sky. And an invasion of Europe from US would be without any base of operation. The US nor Dutch would aid the britons, in simple fear of entering war with the Germans. So the Norwegian government recived great reward for their effort. Half of the fleet perished into the sea by German raiders and subs, and thousends of Norwegian sailors with them. King Haakon is regarded by many as one of the greatest Norwegian leaders of the pre-war period, managing to hold his young and fragile country together in unstable political conditions. In 1927 he said, "I am also the King of the Communists" (government). I don't think there is a single republican among the Norwegian sailors. This is one example, not mentioning all the others when the King was democratically elected or how he maintained democracy for the people. Dispite a fierce autotharian regime. ~Wille
Briefly, i'll say that monarchs have a vested interest in leaving their children a more valuable estate than they received, and so it's in their best interests to cultivate growth and prosperity. Bureaucracies however, because they don't own the government, but only its current use, have only the motivation to use that power to plunder whilst they have it. Monarchs also, are not dictators; and in practice they wield much less power than governments that are owned by a collective rather than a person. Myself being more in favor of a less powerful government, am more inclined to support a monarch over the mob.
