The history of Britain is that of a small island that
began as a collection of territories ruled by chiefs and warlords and gradually
evolved into a constitutional monarchy. Most of Europe evolved up until a
certain point as we did, but then diverged. Collections of territories that tended
to speak similar languages first united under an absolute monarch and then with
various degrees of success moved away from absolutism. Britain was almost
uniquely successful and fortunate. We began our journey to democracy earlier
than anywhere else and transitioned from the divine right of kings to constitutional
monarchy earlier and more peacefully than anyone else. We have been invaded once
or perhaps twice in the past thousand years, our boundaries with one major exception
have remained unchanged, when Europe has revolted, we have largely watched. All
this we owe to royalty.
In the history of succession there are also breaks. At
times the relation of one king to his predecessor has been distant sometimes
non-existent. There is not an unbroken chain going back. It is due to a series
of accidents of history that we have the good fortune to have our present Queen
ruling us. But this doesn’t matter.
We are what we are because of that history. The history
of Britain is the history of our monarchy. Without it we would not know
ourselves.
Our way of government is imperfect, but so is the way
of everyone else. The task of transitioning from absolutism to democracy has
been failed by most of the world. Russia has never made the transition, nor has
China, nor has most of the rest of Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Democracies
are few and some of them have been in existence for less than a lifetime. We may
admire American democracy or Swiss democracy. We may think that a president and
a senate would be better than a Queen and a House of Lords, but really, we
should simply be grateful that we live in one of the few properly democratic
countries in the world. We should also recognise that changing your system of
government more frequently leads to tyranny rather than greater democracy.
Britain could not move towards a “more” democratic
presidential system without revolution and reversing the process that united us
would be more likely to lead to chaos than harmony. There is no guarantee that
what resulted would be more democratic, nor that it would be more free. Secession rarely solves existing problems, but
frequently gives rise to new ones.
It is in this context that we must view the present
difficulties that our Royal Family faces. Britain changes gradually, but when
necessary we do change. It is this that has saved us from much of the horrors
of European history.
Constitutional monarchy depends on consent. So long as
the British people are content to be ruled by the House of Windsor we will be.
But that consent requires something from the Royal Family too. Whereas in
medieval times we might have had a succession of bad kings and nothing would be
done, now something would be done, and it would be done quickly.
I am uninterested in Royal gossip. I do not follow
their tours, nor am I interested in what they open, nor do I pay much attention
to the charitable work they do. I am grateful to have a Queen, because a president
with powers like Macron or Trump is too close to an absolute monarch for my
taste. A president without powers like Germany or Ireland is most frequently a
worthy non-entity. In that case I would rather have a Queen we care about. Let
power rest with the Commons and with the Prime Minister, but better by far not
to have a political head of state, because this is inherently divisive.
My support for the monarchy is therefore
constitutional. I like that we go through the process of having the Queen sign
bills. She may have almost no power, but she does have the power of the queen bee.
She can sting once. She can if necessary, refuse, bring down her whole house,
but perhaps thereby save her country from a tyrant. The monarch is our safety
net. Our monarchy makes change gradual and makes us British.
But we can all tell when someone is trying to use the
Royal Family to make themselves rich or to give themselves a platform to become
greater than any Hollywood megastar. I prefer the manner of the Queen. There is
no gossip about her. We don’t even know her opinions on most issues, because
she is genuinely impartial. We have only ever had glimpses because someone so
vulgar as Tony Blair or David Cameron leaked. The Queen’s wisdom is in not
telling the rest of us what to believe.
The Royal family must be smaller and more private. They
must cease to think of themselves as celebrities. Let the Royal family be the
Queen, Charles, William and his family. Let everyone else be treated with
respect, but not indulged and not allowed to trade on their relationship with
the Queen to gain either fame, money or notoriety. Let them neither expect state weddings, nor state funerals. Let them work, but not by
selling their Royalty to the highest bidder. If necessary, let them live
quietly on a country estate somewhere. Let us not read about them and let us
not care what they do or don’t do. Let us not notice.
