Search This Blog

Monday, 24 January 2011


The single most cirrppling hinderence to world wide monarchist organisations, and the one thing the revolutionaries indisputably command better then most monarchists; is communication and organisation.

I hate to say this but this is a true fact and it needs to be stated. What are monarchists? Generally they are people in favour of tradition, legitimate authority, with emphatise on both, and patriotic. The vast majority of the time they are also profoundly religious or have a sense of religion. In short, the things we share in common are both our greatest asset, but also indisputably make it hard for us to get along with eachother. But not in the same fashion as Revolutionaries bicker and often times kill eachother like rabid dogs.

See, the qualities of monarchism will seperate a german monarchist and a french monarchist due to pride of language, history and loyalty. The are very much the same but are incredibly different, what makes us special and different from the revolutionaries is Monarchism's demand of a higher standards on both public and personal matters, monarchist must conduct themselves in good manner as a matter of sheer principle, (one can not be a monarchist and have no respect for manners. It is disingenious.), so when monarchists disagree with eachother, and we do, Often and passionately, our squabbles themselves, the very moments when our passions rule our minds and we un-man ourselves are squabbles of a higher manner then those shameful dogfights in the revolutionary political arena. This alone is quite an accomplishment.

However the fact remains that this difference often makes Monarchists too proud to share their ideas, I oftentimes myself harp on about the intrinsic need for more monarchist thinkers in the modern era to produce books and written works, more monarchist friendly media needs to be produced and am even an avid proponent in producing propaganda for monarchism. Because these are all things the revolutionary dogs do, and they are a good century ahead of us in this regard, is it any wonder we monarchists find it so hard to convince others of our arguements? We need to communicate better, monarchists around the world need to share their ideas more, the monarchist blogosphere is a fantastic start in this respect but it is not enough, because even communists klnow the value of blogs.


  1. The main difference I see between Monarchists and different Revolutionaries is that Monarchists tend to be patriotic towards their country and supportive of its' interests instead of a so called "Global State". For example when a French Monarchist and a German Monarchist meets, they would probably collide on the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, that is which government owns this.

    Contrary, revolutionaries are absolutely insupportive of their country's interests. They generally believe in such an idea as one global republic where everything is fair(especially towards them the vanguard of the revolution) and have absolutely no support for their country. When the interests of Patriotic Monarchists collide, the interests of Internationalist Revolutionaries don't because they consider themselves fighters for "Global Equitable Society" where they have one objective to fulfill.

    Sadly, there was one time I recall Monarchists helped each other fight their revolutionaries. And this was the revolt of Hungarians in the Austrian Empire, I believe in 1848. The Russian Empire helped its neighbor suppress the revolt, but was payed back with the opposite one could expect: the title of "Gendarme of Europe" and threats during the Crimean War by the Austrians.

    I would doubt us Monarchists will ever be as organized as revolutionaries. Even the revolutionaries after conducting what they want are most commonly divided on the matter of who should take the fruit of revolution. And that is when a battle of rats starts. Up until that point, the revolutionaries are one force driven by the hate towards all that is right.

    While Monarchists focus on imposing policies they suppose are best for their country and they gather around what they support, revolutionaries support the overthrow of the current regime and only then start to enter into conflicts with each other. In other words Monarchists gather around creation while revolutionaries gather around destruction.

  2. I agree. COmmunication of ideas is needed. Exposure tiot he new ideas will lead to new concerts, but we seem to lack the media savvy.

  3. In the media in general if there is an article that mentions monarchy, monarchs, royals or anything relating to monarchy they usually get a jab in on how it is unfair or undemocratic or such. Revolutionaries and republicans certainly do have control of the vast majority of media sources, even supposedly conservative publications. This enables them to easily convince those who do not care to think about or research monarchy and its relation to history.
    A point has been made that in "respectable" academic circles anyone who identifies himself as having monarchistic sympathies is ostracized. Naturally anyone of said sympathies would be inclined to lay low. If there were say a newspaper that revealed such sympathies it would be dismissed as a lightweight and biased.
    All told, the odds are steep but the blogoshere, though not enough, is certainly a good start. More than that, it usually has more worth reading that most news articles nowadays.