Economics:
1) “...we
found quantitatively meaningful evidence that
monarchies outperform republics when it comes
to protecting property rights, which translates
into higher GDP per capita. We found
support for each of our hypotheses when
comparing all monarchies to all republics.”
2) "This paper explores the effects of monarchy on economic institutional quality and provides evidence that monarchies are associated with significantly better institutions."
3) "Albeit lack of significance, the ‘mean GDP’ is slightly higher for monarchy countries than in republic countries. Similarly, the variance statistic (a measure of instability) is lower for constitutional monarchies and higher for republics, indicating that constitutional monarchies appear more economically stable than republic countries."
4) "It is thus fair to conclude that in the contemporary world, after centuries of framing the role of the sovereign in constitutional terms, and especially in the case of the European democratic-constitutional monarchies, people do better economically under monarchies than under republics, whether they are democratic or not."
Opinions:
1) Libertarian perspectives
a) "Constitutional
monarchy cannot solve all problems of
government; nothing can. But it can help.
Besides lesser arguments, two main ones
recommend it. First, its very existence
is a reminder that democracy is not
the sort of thing of which more
is necessarily better; it can help promote
balanced thinking. Second, by
contributing continuity, diluting democracy while
supporting a healthy element of it, and
furthering the separation of government powers,
monarchy can help protect personal liberty."
b) "The idea
of monarchy is understandably abhorrent to
many Americans. But it's also true that
a constitutional monarchy can provide a
better check on political power than constitutional
democracy."
c) “I propose...a revision of the prevailing view of traditional hereditary monarchies and provide...an uncharacteristically favorable interpretation of monarchy and the monarchical experience. In short, monarchical government is...privately owned government, which in turn is explained as promoting future-orientedness and a concern for capital values and economic calculation by the government. Democratic government is...publicly owned government, which is explained as leading to present-orientedness and a disregard or neglect of capital values in government rulers, and the transition from monarchy to democracy is interpreted accordingly as civilizational decline. If one must have a state...then it is economically and ethically advantageous to choose monarchy over democracy."
2) Conservative perspectives
a) "Monarchy
is, most simply, the rule of law
and the spirit of a people incarnate.
It’s the avatar of a nation, the
vessel for its ancient spirit. Our Founders
decided to handle the spirit only, to
do away with the body and accept
what Hannan calls the most sublime form
of English common law. But it seems
this ideal is so sublime as to
be imperceptible: as soon as it appeared,
it was gone. So often we need that
intermediary, someone to devote himself entirely
to what we cannot do casually. Order,
law, liberty, dignity, beauty—the whole organism
of tradition—none of these are best served
by television debates and twelve hours
of voting once every couple of years.
They must have their constant minister.
Which is why, despite all time and
chance and popular opinion, I can’t help
but confess to being a convinced Monarchist."
b) "However
outdated and irrelevant monarchy may appear
to many, it tends to instil in
the general public a healthy respect for
continuity. A head of state performs a
symbolic function, staying out of controversy
and speaking for the nation when it
seems necessary and proper. It may be
prudent to distinguish this role from
that of a battlescarred, elected leader
of government. Perhaps those who happen
to hold political power should not also
enjoy the historical glory. Unlike Rousseau
and the French Revolutionaries, Burke believed
that there should be many sources of
authority, not only one, and that monarchy
could be one of them. Indeed, some
of the freest and stablest regimes in
Europe are monarchies"
c) "Most
people asked the title question to-day
would doubtless contemptuously answer “no!” Some
few – very few in these United
States – might answer in the affirmative.
But how well do either really understand
what they are denying or assenting to?"
d) "Four reasons to become a monarchist
1. Monarchies are pro-people. Monarchies represent all, while politicians are necessarily partisan and divisive.
2. Monarchical tyranny is more easily corrected.
3. Monarchs are born to rule instead of merely happening to rule.
4. For the Christian, Monarchy best represents the inherent hierarchy in the world."
3) Religious perspectives
a) "To be
a monarchist is not to pine away
for some lost paradisiacal past, because,
first, that past never existed; and second,
monarchy IS modern. The whole point of
the scholarship on monarchy is that it
has been everywhere and in all times.
That includes today. Nor should we dichotomize
monarchy and democracy. Democracy has always
been a part of monarchical systems on
some level. Thus the
proper dichotomy is between monarchy and
republics. But all this means that we
should not be seduced into thinking that
our republic, any republic, can be anything
more than what it is (a pluralistic
and secular polity with no place for
God in the public sphere), or that
monarchy can be anything less than it
is (a sacral state that rests on
tsar, Church, and God)."
b) "We are
convinced that the re-establishment of constitutional
parliamentary monarchy would be the perfect
way to connect traditional, centuries-old values
of our people and its glorious past
with the modern era. Constitutional Monarchy
provides unity, stability and continuity. It
is also the guarantor of democracy and
human rights. The break-up with tradition
of monarchy had never had good effects
on a single nation, especially not ours.
The states that have incorporated their
own traditions in the modern era are
the most developed countries in the world
today, and 7 out of 10 are monarchies."
c) "Well,
firstly I am a Monarchist in my
bones. I love the traditions, the ceremony
and the kingliness of the whole affair.
In addition, you will find that it
is not uncommon for serious Libertarians
to advocate for Monarchy as the most
efficient and practical method of ensuring
a just state."
4) Other perspectives
a) "...the
fervor for monarchy in the new democracies
is real. Cynics dismiss it as silly,
nostalgic romanticism, but could it instead
be an altogether rational manifestation of
the universal desire to live well and
be governed well? Although the royal road
has generally been bypassed in the twentieth
century, might it be the surest route
to societal well-being and good government
in the new millennium?"
b) "But
the skeptics are wrong. Constitutional monarchy
is the best system of government known
to man, and it would be a terrible
shame [to] abandoned it."
c) "Constitutional
monarchy is the best form of government
that humanity has yet tried. It has
yielded rich, healthy nations whose regime
transitions are almost always due to elections
and whose heads of state are capable
of being truly apolitical."
d) "Monarchies
have an extremely valuable role to play,
even in the 21st century. If anything
their number should be added to rather
than subtracted from. To understand why,
it is important to consider the merits
of monarchy objectively without resorting to
the tautology that countries ought to
be democracies because they ought to be
democracies."