(not about monarchy in general, rather about the person currently with the title of monarch in your country).
This post adressed to all christian europeans. Modern world sets new challenges for us. I think, that europeans should be unite, if we want to meet modern challenges bravely. But European Union doesn't represents our ideals. What do you think about idea of new Union, based on Christian Faith, GreekPhilosophy and Roman Law?
And of course all countries will be monarchies.
https://preview.redd.it/1gqossd78wu61.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=e981eb8d8b98a57e66efe8e06d21e276412d6a92
And that's a fact
What were Hitler's and the Nazi's views on established European monarchies? For example, if they were able to take Britain, what would have been the fate of the monarchy?
Looking at the Concert of Europe during the early-mid 19th Century, Metternich features prominently. Many of his absolutist policies were implemented, and his resignation and flight to England following the beginning of the 1848 revolution in Austria appeared to embolden the liberal and radical revolutionaries in the Austrian Empire and its neighbours to increase levels of revolt against their local governments.
However, from what I've been able to look up there's continued debate amongst historians about the influence Metternich actually had, given that he was positioned more as a major diplomat rather than the direct ruler of a major autocratic empire.
Is the view of βThe Age of Metternichβ one that is retrospective, his prominence only illuminated in hindsight by (some) historians, while in his day he was lurking in the background? Or was he instead the major figurehead of European absolute monarchy that came to the mind of everybody in the immediate post-Napoleon world?
Was this contemporary view consistent throughout Europe, or did it depend mainly on the region or individual alignment/background (e.g. François Guizot being the face of conservativism of in France)?
What is the current historical consensus on the amount of influence Metternich actually wielded? (Apologies if this breaks the 20 year rule)
Thanks for your time!
I know that Europeans would execute other nobles like the English did to the French during the 100 Years War but those appear to be rare compared to the times they simply kept opposing monarchs alive. For example, after the Battle of Pavia in Emperor Charles V of Spain had King Francis I of France in his custody and did nothing to harm him. Meanwhile, 40 years later in India at the Battle of Talikota the Deccan Sultans were more than happy to execute Aliya Rama Raya, the leader of the Vijayanagara Empire. This also happened quite a bit in China and was a constant in Japan. What lead to the European monarchs treating other heads of state and even lower ranking nobility with such leniency?
Does anyone know what percentage of people want the French, Italian, Portuguese and German etc monarchies to be restored?
Although very unlikely and kind of a wacky idea but if in the future Europe had to unite in some turn of events like ever more increasingly powerful world powers that threatens european influence on the world stage. So assuming Europe would unite (with me personally just counting the EU members (for now)) what royal family or house would have the most legitimacy or make the best rulers for such a nation?
At least in the historical record it doesnβt seem to have made as much of an impact.
So for the monarchies of Europe, should their successor state(s) keep the monarchy if they wish to?
EDIT: I meant to say βconstituent monarchiesβ, i.e. the Danish state could have a monarch, but the Federation would be a federal republic.
With the motto "no taxation without representation", Thirteen Colonies rebelled against British rule and its monarchy, questioning Britain's authority and right to tax them. Thomas Paine's Common Sense contributed to and reinforced Americans' wish to establish a more democratic government with republican ideas. Of course, Britain's ban on American trade with other European nations was another reason but it was relatively a minor one.
This event occured 13 years before the French Revolution and had the same ideas of republicanism and equality as the latter. After all, an assembly of delegates from colonies, not a monarch and his advisors, started to take care of the colonies' interests and even sent envoys to Europe later, e.g. Franklin visited Paris and asked for an alliance in 1778. Equality, even though it wasn't applied to slaves and women, was stressed in the United States' declaration of independence.
So, how come didnβt European monarchies, who were afraid of the ideas of equality and republicanism of the French Revolution, attempt to crush American War of Independence in the first place and watched it happen? Were they busy with internal conflicts or debts? Was it too costly to conduct military operations across the Atlantic? Was it because they wanted Britain to lose some power?
I've recently joined the sub and i would want people's opinions on it.
Personally, i think Greece could have a good shot in the future. They're Government is in need of Reform (Cause you know, debt.), and what better way then changing the government to a tried-and-true style of Government. Plus, i love the Monarchist flag and Coat of Arm's
But that's just my Opinion. what do you guy's think?
Or in other words, if you could go back in time, knowing what you know now about our predominantly Republican world, what would you advise the monarchs of the day to do differently?
Settings:
- Pick anytime you want to start so as long it extend about a century.
- Doesn't matter of which national, feudal, tribal, or cultural-societal origin its from so as long their from Christian or pagan Europe and make sure to give some smart adventages of how this wealthy person or family expands its territory.
- More land around the world are owned by this one ruler or dynasty than the British and Mongol Empire combined.
I'm just interested in knowing how you envision the integration of all of the different forms of government in Europe.
