Ed Dutton is someone I like, respect and admire, especially in his popularization of the science work. At present he has no peer. And his use of humor only serves to make the work he promotes every more accessible.
However, I am an expert at consequences of that behavioral science in social, economic, political, geostrategic consequences especially over time – at much greater scale, and with much greater precision.
So if I tell you that monarchies, in a republic, under rule of law of the natural common concurrent law, are the last line of defense, but that we must defend them so that they can exercise that defense against the evils to folly of man, I say so because as in all things I express with confidence, it’s because I am certain, without question, that there is no other alternative to rule of law, with a monarchy as a judge of last resort, becuase political systems always fail, and a monarchy that is above the law in the restoration of the law is the political ‘pull in case of political emergency’ switch every civilized people requires. The existing northern european monarchies are via-negativa monarchies. They place limits on the folly of people and the natural failures of political processes.
For example, in the states, we no longer have a monarchy to appeal to when the parliament (congreass and president) fail to solve seroius issues because they have a political agenda that is hostile to the interests of the polity but cannot be corrected because of the practical consequences of participatory democracy. ie: the immigration problem should be trival to solve becuase it is a violation of the natural, common, concurrent law to allow the entry of people who impose a social, econmic, poltical and strategy costs on those who have already invested in that polity.
And in addition, it’s the solution to maintaining a national family rather than a corporate state devoted to globalism.
So it is not the monarchy’s fault that we do not defend them. It’s not the monarchy’s fault that they are trying to outlast this political folly of mass democracy without citizen sovereignty, and the soverignty of the constitution of natural, common, concurrent law before that of the government.
The problem is the people.
We always get the government we deserve.
That’s because too few of us are deserving of the governmetn we need.
Reply addressees: @teodoriancu14