I have an inherent dislike of monarchies. I can understand how the English monarchy was essential in the 17th century, because the world system wouldn't have given proper respect to elected heads of state and the presence of monarchists, but wonder if it could have been done with an elected king of some sort who might rule for life.
Almost like the Pope, who's corpse is more important than the heir to the throne's wedding.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-10 12:16 pm (UTC)Almost like the Pope, who's corpse is more important than the heir to the throne's wedding.