The world needs more kings and queens, monarchists say
OXFORD, England — From the comfort of his country estate in Oxford, a distant relative of the Russian literary giant Tolstoy said he has the perfect solution for what ails the United States.
The United States, he declared, needs a monarchy.
Count Nikolai Tolstoy said more kings, queens and all the frippery that royalty brings would be not just a salve for a superpower in political turmoil, but also a stabilizing force for the world at large.
“I love the monarchy,” Tolstoy, 82, said as he sat in his lush garden behind an expansive stone house. “Most people think the monarchy is just decorative and filled with splendor and personalities. They do not appreciate the important ideological reasons for a monarchy.”
The count is not the only voice advocating rule by royalty. An author and a conservative politician who holds dual British and Russian citizenship, he leads the International Monarchist League and is part of a loose confederation of monarchists scattered across the globe, including in the United States.
Their core arguments: Countries with monarchies are better off because royal families act as a unifying force and a powerful symbol; monarchies rise above politics; and nations with royalty are generally richer and more stable.
Critics said such views are antiquated and alarming in an era when democracies around the globe appear to be imperiled. The count and his band of fellow monarchists, however, are determined to make their case at conferences, in editorials and at fancy balls.
A recent study that examined the economic performance of monarchies versus republics bolsters their views. Led by Mauro F. Guillen, a management professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, the study found “robust and quantitatively meaningful evidence” that monarchies outperform other forms of government.
Far from being a dying system, the study said, “monarchies are surprisingly prevalent around the world.” They provide a “stability that often translates into economic gains”; they are better at protecting property rights and checking abuses of power by elected officials; and they have higher per-capita national incomes, the study said.
History books, of course, are replete with examples of monarchies that became symbols of repression and rapacious, cloistered wealth. Some were ousted by bloody rebellions (the U.S. and French Revolutions) or collapsed in ruins (the Habsburg Empire), and many have ruthlessly marginalized whole classes of people.
But Tolstoy insists monarchists are not pining for the days of absolute rulers and the divine right of kings, when Henry VIII of England could order up the execution of unwanted wives and political foes. Instead, his group advocates constitutional monarchies, in which a king or queen is head of state and the real power rests with an elected Parliament — much like those in Belgium, Britain, Denmark, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway and Spain (although demonstrators in 2014 demanded a referendum on the Spanish royal family after King Juan Carlos abdicated).
All of those countries, the monarchists note, have relatively strong economies.
Guillen’s study shows that since 1900, 22 countries have abandoned royal leaders, while 35 others adopted them. Forms of constitutional monarchies took root, at least for some time, in emerging economies such as Malaysia and Thailand.
Still, the study noted some current monarchies lack basic democratic freedoms, including in Brunei, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Swaziland.
Finding people to reject the monarchists’ vision is not hard, even in Britain, where Queen Elizabeth II is revered by many.
A London-based grassroots organization called Republic, which wants the country to hold a referendum on the monarchy when the queen dies, says bluntly on its website, “The monarchy isn’t fit for purpose. It is corrupt and secretive.”
The group has a clear mandate: “We want to see the monarchy abolished and the queen replaced with an elected democratic head of state,” it says.
Graham Smith, Republic’s chief executive, said current polls showed about 20 to 25 percent of Britons to be anti-royalty, and that it had been hard to win broader support. “Our job is to keep raising that number,” he said, adding that “public opinion takes time to shift.”