Why not install a monarchy in the USA?

Monday 23:54:25
February 25 2008

Why not install a monarchy in the USA?

View 166.6K

word 593 read time 2 minutes, 57 Seconds

2000 and 2004: The Republicans and Democrats using archaic election laws [and other methods] repress ALL Alternative Political Parties and each other. Neither Republican or Democrat wanted to concede defeat. It took a Supreme Court Decision to name a President in 2000. 2000-More: Countries that are republics start behaving as absolute monarchies. Cuba has the Castro Dynasty, Syria: the Assad Dynasty, North Korea: the Kim Dynasty, Azerbaijan: The Aliyev Dynasty, Democratic Republic of Congo: The Kabila Dynasty, and the USA [Massachusetts: Kennedy Dynasty, Texas and Florida: Bush Dynasty, Arkansas and New York: Clinton Dynasty, and Ohio: Taft Dynasty]. 2006: Lopez Obrador of the PRD loses by a small difference of a vote and refuses to accept defeat. In fact, he established a parallel government in Mexico to Calderon's PAN Government. While Republics have been found to be Saviours and Monarchies have been blamed for everything bad, there appears to be a growing sensation that Republics had not brought peace and stability. Albania [although they rejected the restoration of the monarchy in 1997], has occasional demonstrators saying "Down With Communists. We Want a King". Countries like Italy and Greece with discriminatory laws against Royal Houses have awoken a minority who at least talk about monarchy. Estonia even offered Prince Andrew "the throne of Estonia" in 1994. Central Europe has also talked about monarchy. France has had monarchist parties for some time.

In the American Continent, there are movements for a monarchy in Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, and the USA. While the USA is going to remain a republic, there are royalist parties that have been formed. In 1997, the Royalist Party of America [symbolized by the color purple and a crown] wants to educate the people of America on the concept of monarchy. In 2000, the American Monarchist Movement is founded with the goal of establishing a Constitutional Monarchy in USA. There is also the Constantinian Society [a USA Monarchist Think Tank in Boston Massachusetts]. The American Monarchist Party is another party that favors a monarchy in the USA with a member of the British Royal Family ruling USA. The American Monarchist Party also favors the USA rejoining the British Commonwealth. In the article "Zog for Albania, Edward for Estonia, and Monarchs for All the Rest? The Royal Road to Prosperity, Democracy, and World Peace", the authors [Jeremy D. Mayer, Assistant Professor of Kalamazoo College and Lee Sigelman,Professor of Political Science George Washington University] argue that monarchy "could serve as a check against a group of rapaciously capitalist barons" and "could serve as a bastion for "peace" and "intangible benefits of greater interpersonal trust, a more egalitarian income distribution, pan-ethnic unity, and stronger democracy". Their article on the studies of democracy vs republic appears at home1.gte.net/eskandar/apsamonarchy.html . The Washington Times Journalist Richard Morin wrote about the study in 1999 with the title: "Unconventional Wisdom". While these associations do not want to impose monarchism, and recognize that America will remain a republic; it is not fair or democratic that the two main political parties in America [Republicans and Democrats] and other shades of right and left [Communists, Socialists, Nazis] continue to monopolize the political conversations in America. America should prove itself worthy of human rights respect by allowing diverse opinions to express themselves in the media. Other countries that talk about human rights should do the same thing. Certain areas of Europe [as well as Asia, Africa, and the Middle East] have matured enough in their politics in order to bring such discussions to the forefront. Why cannot the USA?

Roberto Alvarez-Galloso

Source by La_Circolare_Spigolosa

Similar Articles / Why not ... the USA?