Theme: Governance

MONARCHY vs. CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY vs. DEMOCRACY

Assuming rule of law exists (european customary law of sovereignty and tort):

In a constitutional monarchy either the monarchy asks for approval from the people directly or from their representatives, or the people ask approval of the monarchy.

However, without approval one direction or the other you have Democracy (population) or Prussianism (monarchy) – not any form of monarchy no matter what pretenses you make.

So, a monarchy may include democratic and republican participation, but a democracy cannot contain a monarchy.

The principle reason being where the decision of last resort rests: with the house or with the monarch.

As I undrestand it, in order to retain rule of law, where the monarchy is the judge of last resort, the monarchy must retain right of veto (dissent).

If a monarchy is successful in manufacturing rule of law it should be possible for the people to produce houses of governance.

This is simply a utilitarian solution, since there is little if any evidence that democracy does anything other than consume accumulated capital at the expense of those who created it, and those who would have inherited it, and the goods that come from its preservation.