The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #501  
Old 10-14-2021, 06:25 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist View Post
Question: How would a Romanian-style arrangement actually work in a place such as Italy where the succession to the defunct royal throne is disputed? Should be Italian republican government give both claimants some kind of official recognition, or what?
No chance. The Italian Government will most likely only deal with an undisputed person from the former Royal House.

As former heads-of-state themselves, Michael von Hohenzollern (Romania), Simeon von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha (Bulgaria) and Constantine of Greece and Denmark (The Hellenes) were undisputed heads of their respective Royal Houses.

As long as Vittorio Emanuele di Savoia and Aimone di Savoia-Aosta dispute the headship of the House, there is no chance that the Italian Republic will offer one of them a semi-formal position, including a royal residence, an official secretariate, a Budget and all kinds of assistance to have a ceremonial and protocollary role.

That is why factions in a former Royal House are extremely damaging. In the Italian case time could have done "healing" work as according the Constitution of the Kingdom and the House Laws the successor after Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia (son of Vittorio Emanuele) is his cousin Aimone di Savoia-Aosta.

But a few years ago suddenly Vittorio Emanuele unilaterally decided that the daughters of Emanuele Filiberto will be successors. This is new fuel to factionism.

So any formal role can be forgotten as the Republic of Italy has no any desire to mingle into a dynastic feud. Caesar already said it: Divide et Empera (divide - and rule). As long as the House of Italy is divided, the Republic rules and ignores them as infighting nobodies.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #502  
Old 10-14-2021, 08:10 PM
rominet09's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: LIEGE, Belgium
Posts: 5,036
I don't think a country will go back to Monarchy. History doesn't go back in the past.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #503  
Old 10-14-2021, 08:26 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,546
My opinion on this subject is the same now as it has always been. Major countries in Europe that are republics will never go back into being monarchies. Nor will the minor ones, except perhaps for Romania which may perhaps change in the future. A faint chance only. On the other hand I can never see Japan choosing to become a republic.
Reply With Quote
  #504  
Old 10-14-2021, 08:34 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
No chance. The Italian Government will most likely only deal with an undisputed person from the former Royal House.

As former heads-of-state themselves, Michael von Hohenzollern (Romania), Simeon von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha (Bulgaria) and Constantine of Greece and Denmark (The Hellenes) were undisputed heads of their respective Royal Houses.

As long as Vittorio Emanuele di Savoia and Aimone di Savoia-Aosta dispute the headship of the House, there is no chance that the Italian Republic will offer one of them a semi-formal position, including a royal residence, an official secretariate, a Budget and all kinds of assistance to have a ceremonial and protocollary role.

That is why factions in a former Royal House are extremely damaging. In the Italian case time could have done "healing" work as according the Constitution of the Kingdom and the House Laws the successor after Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia (son of Vittorio Emanuele) is his cousin Aimone di Savoia-Aosta.

But a few years ago suddenly Vittorio Emanuele unilaterally decided that the daughters of Emanuele Filiberto will be successors. This is new fuel to factionism.

So any formal role can be forgotten as the Republic of Italy has no any desire to mingle into a dynastic feud. Caesar already said it: Divide et Empera (divide - and rule). As long as the House of Italy is divided, the Republic rules and ignores them as infighting nobodies.
Yeah, that makes sense. When monarchists fight and are divided, then republicans win. Something similar occurred in early 1870s France, when the monarchists were split between the Legitimists and the Orleanists and Henri, Count of Chambord (the Legitimist claimant whom the Orleanists embraced) refused to go as far as the Orleanists would have been willing to go in order to acquire the French throne, such as by embracing the revolutionary French tricolor flag. So, France has remained a republic even since then (with the exception of several years during World War II when it was an authoritarian dictatorship, of course), for around 150 years!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rominet09 View Post
I don't think a country will go back to Monarchy. History doesn't go back in the past.
It could have happened in Afghanistan in 2001-2002 had the Bush Administration actually supported this instead of opposing it. I wonder if this would have actually resulted in a more successful final outcome in that war, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
My opinion on this subject is the same now as it has always been. Major countries in Europe will never go back into being monarchies. Nor will the minor ones, except perhaps for Romania which may perhaps change in the future. A faint chance only. On the other hand I can never see Japan choosing to become a republic.
Yeah, Japan's Emperor was literally viewed as a God-like figure by Japanese until the end of World War II, if I recall correctly. I wonder what margin the Japanese would have voted to keep their monarchy by right after the end of World War II had a referendum on the future of Japan's monarchy been done around 1946 similar to how it was actually done in Italy for its own monarchy during this exact same time.
Reply With Quote
  #505  
Old 10-14-2021, 08:38 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist View Post
Question: How would a Romanian-style arrangement actually work in a place such as Italy where the succession to the defunct royal throne is disputed? Should be Italian republican government give both claimants some kind of official recognition, or what?

The Italian Republic doesn't recognize any claimant to the throne and most likely never will. In fact, the Savoys were only allowed to return to Italy after publicly renouncing any claims to the throne.
Reply With Quote
  #506  
Old 10-14-2021, 08:45 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
The Italian Republic doesn't recognize any claimant to the throne and most likely never will. In fact, the Savoys were only allowed to return to Italy after publicly renouncing any claims to the throne.
Makes sense. And it's interesting that the length of their exile was comparable to the length of French royal families' previous exile from France. For the Savoyards, their exile lasted from 1948 to 2002, whereas the French royal families' exile lasted from 1886 to 1950. So, 54 years versus 64 years. Not a huge difference.
Reply With Quote
  #507  
Old 10-15-2021, 03:21 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
The Italian Republic doesn't recognize any claimant to the throne and most likely never will. In fact, the Savoys were only allowed to return to Italy after publicly renouncing any claims to the throne.
It was more about a Romania-role for the former Italian royal family. The House of Romania accepts the Republican form of State and has a ceremonial and protocollary role within it because the Republic acknowledges the unique and shared history with the former Royal House.

The Italian Republic can equally create a ceremonial and protocollary role for the head of the former Royal House. If there is a country studded with ceremonial and protocol, then it is Italy. And as they tend to give the (largely ceremonial) presidency to very old, wobbly and not so healthy former politicians, making the Palazzo di Quirinale alike a gerontocrats' home, I can see a role for a Aimone & Olga, or for a Emanuele Filiberto & Clotilde.

But without an end to the dynastical infighting: forget it. And to be fair: Emanuele Filiberto's antics in reality shows and Pizza restaurants and Clotilde parading on every red carpet between Cannes and Venice does not really make them stand out against the very honourable and most affable, serene figures of Giorgio Napolitano, Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, Oscar Luigi Scalfaro and other Sphinx-acting presidents.
Reply With Quote
  #508  
Old 10-15-2021, 09:49 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
It was more about a Romania-role for the former Italian royal family. The House of Romania accepts the Republican form of State and has a ceremonial and protocollary role within it because the Republic acknowledges the unique and shared history with the former Royal House.

The Italian Republic can equally create a ceremonial and protocollary role for the head of the former Royal House. If there is a country studded with ceremonial and protocol, then it is Italy. And as they tend to give the (largely ceremonial) presidency to very old, wobbly and not so healthy former politicians, making the Palazzo di Quirinale alike a gerontocrats' home, I can see a role for a Aimone & Olga, or for a Emanuele Filiberto & Clotilde.

But without an end to the dynastical infighting: forget it. And to be fair: Emanuele Filiberto's antics in reality shows and Pizza restaurants and Clotilde parading on every red carpet between Cannes and Venice does not really make them stand out against the very honourable and most affable, serene figures of Giorgio Napolitano, Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, Oscar Luigi Scalfaro and other Sphinx-acting presidents.

Although I agree with you about Emanuele Filiberto and his family, honestly, I can’t see a Romania-like situation happening anytime soon in Italy for 3 main reasons that have nothing to do with the current pretenders personally:
  • The Italian Republic is officially very hostile to the former royal house(s), the former nobility and the former knighthood of Italy by basically not recognizing any of them. Ironically, in private, that is not the case as many Italian nobles use for example courtesy titles socially.
  • There is still a lot of resentment against the House of Savoy in Italy because of King Victor Emmanuel III’s behavior during the Mussolini era and World War II. That has been passed down even to younger generations although those events took place a long time ago now.
  • The House of Savoy is a very old dynasty tracing their ancestry a thousand years back (or close to that) in male line. However, it only became the national royal house of Italy in 1861. Prior to unification, Italy had several sovereign families and, unlike in Germany, where the former sovereign families were allowed to continue ruling in their respective territories under the Prussian king as the German emperor, what happened in Italy was that the Savoys basically dethroned everybody else to become the only (official) Italian royal family. I heard from many Italians that they feel that the House of Savoy never established a national connection with Italy (like the Orange-Nassau in the Netherlands for example) and that they are (or were) often seen as putting the interests of their own family/dynasty above the national interest. It would be interesting if some Italian posters could comment if they feel that way too.
Reply With Quote
  #509  
Old 10-15-2021, 05:36 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Although I agree with you about Emanuele Filiberto and his family, honestly, I can’t see a Romania-like situation happening anytime soon in Italy for 3 main reasons that have nothing to do with the current pretenders personally:
  • The Italian Republic is officially very hostile to the former royal house(s), the former nobility and the former knighthood of Italy by basically not recognizing any of them. Ironically, in private, that is not the case as many Italian nobles use for example courtesy titles socially.
  • There is still a lot of resentment against the House of Savoy in Italy because of King Victor Emmanuel III’s behavior during the Mussolini era and World War II. That has been passed down even to younger generations although those events took place a long time ago now.
  • The House of Savoy is a very old dynasty tracing their ancestry a thousand years back (or close to that) in male line. However, it only became the national royal house of Italy in 1861. Prior to unification, Italy had several sovereign families and, unlike in Germany, where the former sovereign families were allowed to continue ruling in their respective territories under the Prussian king as the German emperor, what happened in Italy was that the Savoys basically dethroned everybody else to become the only (official) Italian royal family. I heard from many Italians that they feel that the House of Savoy never established a national connection with Italy (like the Orange-Nassau in the Netherlands for example) and that they are (or were) often seen as putting the interests of their own family/dynasty above the national interest. It would be interesting if some Italian posters could comment if they feel that way too.
In regards to your point #2 here, if one believes in ancestral guilt, this would only apply to the senior branch of the House of Savoy, no? The junior branch of the House of Savoy (specifically the Savoy-Aosta branch) is descended in the male line from Italian King Victory Emmanuel II, who died in 1878. So, it's rather hard to argue that the Savoy-Aostas actually bear any ancestral blame for Mussolini's rise to power, no?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
It was more about a Romania-role for the former Italian royal family. The House of Romania accepts the Republican form of State and has a ceremonial and protocollary role within it because the Republic acknowledges the unique and shared history with the former Royal House.

The Italian Republic can equally create a ceremonial and protocollary role for the head of the former Royal House. If there is a country studded with ceremonial and protocol, then it is Italy. And as they tend to give the (largely ceremonial) presidency to very old, wobbly and not so healthy former politicians, making the Palazzo di Quirinale alike a gerontocrats' home, I can see a role for a Aimone & Olga, or for a Emanuele Filiberto & Clotilde.

But without an end to the dynastical infighting: forget it. And to be fair: Emanuele Filiberto's antics in reality shows and Pizza restaurants and Clotilde parading on every red carpet between Cannes and Venice does not really make them stand out against the very honourable and most affable, serene figures of Giorgio Napolitano, Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, Oscar Luigi Scalfaro and other Sphinx-acting presidents.
In regards to your paragraph #3 here, is the Savoy-Aosta branch much more dignified in comparison to the senior Savoy branch?

Also, would the same issues that prevent official recognition of any role for the former Italian royal family likewise apply to France due to the fact that French royalists are split among Legitimists, Orleanists, and Bonapartists?

What about Germany? Is formal recognition for their royal family easier to imagine? Or do they still have ancestral guilt for World War I as well as for Crown Prince Wilhelm's support for Hitler in the early 1930s?
Reply With Quote
  #510  
Old 10-24-2021, 08:09 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Bandung, Indonesia
Posts: 30
Imagining the establishment of new monarchies

I know some countries used to be monarchies with defined claimants in case they become monarchies again, but what about those that don’t? In that case, I imagine that such countries would establish new dynasties when switching to monarchies. Below are some countries and my bizarre imaginations for them. I’m not including countries with known claimants to abolished thrones (e.g. Serbia). Also, the monarchies I’m talking about are of the constitutional kind unless otherwise noted.

Disclaimer: I am in no way using this thread to advocate for the restoration of abolished monarchies or establishment of new ones. Its sole purpose is to have fun and relax.
  • Argentina: Princess Alexia or Ariane of the Netherlands would make a fine queen of Argentina, mainly because of their mom being Argentinian. If that’s the case, whoever gets picked to be monarch should marry an Argentine to cement blood ties with the country even more. Alternatively, elevate the Zorreguietas (Queen Maxima’s family) to Argentina’s royal family should Alexia and Ariane refuse.
  • Armenia: I can’t see Kim Kardashian accepting the role of queen because she would balk at the idea of reducing herself into a mere figurehead. I’d say make Kim and Kanye’s daughter North West queen and marry her to a European prince or noble boy as her prince consort. She should pick an Armenian name like Hripsime or Zabel for her regnal name, and go with Kardashian for her dynasty name because it’s an Armenian last name and very famous worldwide.
  • Azerbaijan: The Aliyevs have been accused of turning their country into a monarchy in all but name. What if they officially declare their country one, eh? I bet they’ll abuse loopholes to gain more power regularly.
  • Belarus: Due to the protests against Lukashenko, I can’t help but imagine a scenario in which Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya becomes queen. Maybe she’ll establish her family as a royal family named the House of Tsikhanousky.
  • Botswana: The Khama family would make the country’s ideal royal family. After all, Seretse Khama himself was the kgosi (king) of the Bamangwato, a prominent chieftaincy in Botswana. Moreover, his descendants are prominent in Botswana, so why not?
  • Colombia: What if Andrea and Tatiana Casiraghi become King and Queen of Colombia? After all, Tatiana’s family is a major conglomerate family from Colombia.
  • Cuba: I can totally see Grand Duchess Maria Teresa of Luxembourg plotting to overthrow Cuba’s communist regime and install a monarchy in its place, with either Alexandra or Sébastien as its monarch. She would then pressure encourage her kid to marry a Cuban like her in the name of cementing blood ties with the country love.
  • East Timor: Someone play matchmaker for a Liurai (a tribal chief in Timor) and Infanta Maria Francisca. If they really love each other, they should marry and establish a dynasty that rules East Timor.
  • Ecuador: I fancy one of the three younger children of Crown Prince Pavlos and Crown Princess Marie-Chantal of Greece becoming Ecuador’s first king. This obviously has to do with Marie-Chantal being half-Ecuadorian.
  • Estonia: A descendant of president Lennart Meri would make an ideal monarch of Estonia because Meri’s leadership helped turn Estonia into one of the former Soviet Union’s success stories. In a twist of fate, said descendant marries one of the Earl of Wessex’s kids because some Estonian “royalists” consider making Edward their king. Alternatively, just make Louise or James Estonia’s new monarch.
  • Gabon: Ali Bongo Ondimba became president after his dad died, so it would be amusing to see him declaring himself king and his son Noureddin as crown prince.
  • India: Any of the former royal families in India would be a fitting choice to rule all of India as an empire, given the country’s size and power. Alternatively, the Nehru-Gandhi family should totally declare themselves India’s imperial family because of their power and influence in India.
  • Indonesia: I like the idea of the Hamengkubuwonos ruling all of Indonesia, though they seem to be content with just Yogyakarta. If the latter’s true, I’d say a descendant of Sukarno as monarch.
  • Kazakhstan: The Nazarbayevs would make the ideal royal family. After all, they’re fairly entrenched in Kazakhstan’s public sphere since independence. Not to mention that Nursultan Nazarbayev’s late ex-son-in-law Rakhat Aliyev said that Kazakhstan should consider becoming a monarchy.
  • Mali: Anyone up for the establishment of Mali as a kingdom? Rechristening it as the Mali Empire would be too pretentious because of the country’s average size and widespread poverty. The only question is who would be the ideal monarch. Obviously a Malian national, of course.
  • Pakistan: Prince Hassan and Princess Sarvath of Jordan’s son Prince Rashid would make a fine sultan of Pakistan because of his mother’s Pakistani roots.
  • Panama: Prince Alfons of Liechtenstein would make a fine king of Panama because his mom’s Panamanian, which will give him a leg up in identifying with the country’s people.
  • Peru: I’d say Prince Christian of Hanover, his wife Princess Alessandra, and their kids would be the perfect royal family for Peru because of Alessandra’s Peruvian nationality. Bonus points if subsequent heirs marry in indigenous Peruvians, especially the Quechuas.
  • Philippines: The Jaworski family would make a fine choice. The oldest two sons of Robert Jaworski, Jr. and Mikee Cojuangco would make perfect husbands for Princess Leonor and Infanta Sofia of Spain, respectively. The oldest, Robbie, can be Leonor’s consort while the middle kid Rafael can be crown prince (and eventually king) of the Philippines.
  • Singapore: If Singapore were to become a monarchy, it would be a principality like Monaco due to its small size. The princely family would be that of Lee Kwan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong because these two prime ministers have served in Singapore for so long. In fact, Lee Kwan Yew’s policies helped develop Singapore into an economic powerhouse since independence, and his family has played a prominent role in shaping Singapore ever since.
  • Tajikistan: Apparently, Emomali Rahmon is grooming his son Rustam Emomali as his successor. It sounds like Rahmon better be cajoled into declaring himself king and Rustam crown prince. They would probably have to go for a semi-constitutional monarchy if they want to cling to power, though there’s a change they’d go for an absolute one instead.
  • Togo: How about making Alexandre Grimaldi-Coste the king of Togo? After all, his dad is Prince Albert II of Monaco and his mom Nicole is Togolese, which would give him some leg up in case he becomes king.
  • Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan: These two countries are currently ruled by strongmen who might as well use their power to make themselves semi-constitutional or absolute monarchies, most likely the latter. They might need creative ways to stay in power, especially from China, whose communist government isn’t exactly fond of monarchism.
  • Venezuela: I realize that this example crosses into serious territory, because the crisis since 2014 sometimes makes me wonder whether the country could do well as a monarchy that keeps politicians accountable, maintains much-needed stability, restores unity, and hopefully improves Venezuela’s economy and international image. My top choice for monarch would be human rights activist Thor Halvorssen Mendoza, who is a descendant of Venezuela’s first president Cristóbal Mendoza and of Simón Bolívar’s sister Juana Bolívar Palacios. He can use his middle name Leonardo as his regnal name. This most likely means Nicolas Maduro must go because of the damage he has wrought to Venezuela.
Reply With Quote
  #511  
Old 10-24-2021, 09:04 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,575
No any new monarchy will be established. The current monarchies (with mainly ceremonial and protocollary role) only survive because these are embedded in a historically grown status-quo.

They are "tolerated" while everyone realizes the anomaly of having hereditary succession of the highest office of state inside a particular family within in a parliamentary democracy.

With other words: too much fuzz to remove them ánd with their ceremonial and protocollary role they are just ornamental to the Theatre of State.
Reply With Quote
  #512  
Old 10-24-2021, 12:36 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Bandung, Indonesia
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
No any new monarchy will be established. The current monarchies (with mainly ceremonial and protocollary role) only survive because these are embedded in a historically grown status-quo.

They are "tolerated" while everyone realizes the anomaly of having hereditary succession of the highest office of state inside a particular family within in a parliamentary democracy.

With other words: too much fuzz to remove them ánd with their ceremonial and protocollary role they are just ornamental to the Theatre of State.
I’m not implying that it’s possible for new monarchies to be created. In fact, I find it impossible, hence the absurdity of my “suggestions”. As I’ve said earlier, I created this thread to lighten up the mood, so no need to be a party pooper.

And “no any”? Please omit the “any” next time.
Reply With Quote
  #513  
Old 10-24-2021, 02:42 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 663
It partly depends, how one defines monarchy: Is for example North Korea, where power is inherited from the father to the son, absolute power, a monarchy? It depends...

I am quite "optimistic" that we will see more person centred regimes, in which power stays within one family, soon enough...

Now, besides that, what is with constitutional monarchies? The last, me thinks, which was erected without a real tradiion, was Norway. They elected 1905 a King out of a bunch of Danish nobles.

And why not? The European countries, which abolished monarchy, are total losers the one way or the other. The took a big L, blamed the King and that's it. But what, if they take another big Loss, while now there is no Monarch anymore to blame? Monarchs are perfect scape goats... Every decent nation should have one!
Reply With Quote
  #514  
Old 10-24-2021, 03:14 PM
Prinsara's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 1,917
You claim that these are all fun and lighthearted, but then take care to consider how precarious Venezuela is, while just saying either of Maxima's non-heiress daughters would be a great queen of Argentina OR the Zorreguieta family, ignoring the fact Jorge Zorreguieta wasn't allowed at his daughter's wedding due to his complicity with the country's last terror regime?

Maxima and her girls are very popular there but I'm still pretty sure the Argentinians would prefer somebody else. Why not a descendant of San Martin?
Reply With Quote
  #515  
Old 10-24-2021, 03:24 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 10,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prinsara View Post
You claim that these are all fun and lighthearted, but then take care to consider how precarious Venezuela is, while just saying either of Maxima's non-heiress daughters would be a great queen of Argentina OR the Zorreguieta family, ignoring the fact Jorge Zorreguieta wasn't allowed at his daughters' wedding due to his complicity with the country's last terror regime?

Maxima and her girls are very popular there but I'm still pretty sure the Argentinians would prefer somebody else. Why not a descendant of San Martin?
Because Jose de San Martin does not have living descendants?
(Both his granddaughters - children of his only daughter - died childless)
Reply With Quote
  #516  
Old 10-24-2021, 03:29 PM
Prinsara's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 1,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biri View Post
Because Jose de San Martin does not have living descendants?
(Both his granddaughters - children of his only daughter - died childless)
Which I'm still sure they'd probably prefer over a Zorreguieta. Or any of a list of people who do have descendants.
Reply With Quote
  #517  
Old 10-24-2021, 03:40 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 14,808
I don't know if my suggestion is lighthearted. But in an alternative world I can easily envision: Scotland will create it's own monarchy, perhaps based on a branch of the BRF seeking refuge there.

In the very dark vision I have, Scotland will secede from UK and given that things in that alternative world may not change in a foreseeable future, a member of the BRF may be recognized as a provisional head of state - with support from not only the ethnic Scottish but also other ethnicities living in Scotland.
And over time, say ten years, the provisional head of state and his/her family will de facto become and eventually be crowned as monarch of Scotland under say the name of Stewart or James.

Other alternative: Russia.
Having a tzar, that is controlled by the government, might in many ways legitimize the government even more and perhaps appeal very much to Russian nationalism - I need not add that nationalism is very much on the rise globally...
It also removes the annoying problem with having a president, with a diffuse but potentially "irritating" role. Instead there will be a PM, "sanctioned and appointed" by the tsar.
There will be the glitter and magnificence of a resurrected Russia. Should appeal to quite a few.

Third alternative: Turkey.
Erdogan is doing his best (along with his family and close supporters) to pull an Augustus. I.e. being the "First Citizen" and we all know how that developed...
Erdogan has millions of devoted supporters (many of whom, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, live in EU) who would happily appoint Erdogan to President for Life - and what's the differences between that and First Citizen and eventually Sultan?
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
constitution, future, pretender, restore, royalist


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which Country Could Next Abolish Their Monarchy? norwegianne General Royal Discussion 537 06-20-2018 04:55 PM
From a country saved by the Monarchy Haliotis Member Introductions 3 03-30-2008 04:27 PM




Popular Tags
18th birthday america american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian birth britain britannia british royal family cadwallader camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles charles china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house colorblindness crown jewels dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family tree fashion and style genetics george vi hello! highgrove history japan japanese imperial family japan history jewellery kensington palace king juan carlos liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists mongolia nara period noble families norway crown princely couple politics portugal prince harry prince of wales in jordan queen victoria royal ancestry samurai solomon j solomon spanish royal family state visit st edward sussex suthida thai royal family tokugawa unfinished portrait united states united states of america wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:07 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×