Showing posts with label monarchy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label monarchy. Show all posts

Monday, March 22, 2021

"Give Us a King"

Wednesday, January 27, 2021

While Rome Burns, This Is What Latin Integralists Do

Wednesday, November 25, 2020

Legitimism

Thursday, November 12, 2020

Matilda: Empress, Queen, Warrior by Catherine Hanley



Yale University Press

Saturday, January 09, 2016

Who will rally to the Stuarts?

In the creation of a new republic, is a transitional monarchy necessary? If so, should the last legitimate dynasty be asked to help, for the sake of history and tradition? Or would any old strong man do?

Once I Was a Clever Boy: Jacoabite Commemoration

On 8 January 2016, with the gracious permission of Her Majesty The Queen, the British Ambassador to the Holy See Nigel...

Posted by Vatican Radio - English Section on Saturday, January 9, 2016

Related:


Wednesday, February 11, 2015

800th Anniversary of the Magna Carta

Website - FB
Salisbury Cathedral
Magna Cartas united at British Library to celebrate 800th anniversary

Protecting rights of nobles at first, its meaning was then appropriated by the so-called republicans of the 16th and 17th centuries to encompass all Englishmen...







From England to America: Magna Carta and the Supremacy of Law by Russell Kirk

How well known was the story of King Arthur and his knights to the English elites of the 13th century?

Eric Bana to play King Arthur's father in Guy Ritchie's KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE!

I don't think he can top Boorman, even if he is doing a 6-movie series.



Thursday, November 28, 2013

Surprise Monarchists?

Geeks for Monarchy: The Rise of the Neoreactionaries

The nerds who would be kings?

I've seen the use of "Cathedral" before by Roissy. Did he get it from Yarvin? I'm anti-democracy, but that's because I'm a republican.

Sunday, May 12, 2013

An Argument for Monarchy

Exalted Hierarchy by John Maelstrom

The monarch would be elected and not inherit his office from his father; this would be more in accordance with distributive justice.

Sunday, November 04, 2012

Kings and Pretenders



Managed to get some time to see Gwanghae [Masquerade] (광해, 왕이 된 남자) three Saturdays ago; it's good entertainment but it may be a bit incredible that someone of a rather "modest" background could be a better king than the real king. (I suppose it depends on what one thinks of the king - being an improvement may not take much.) Lee Byung Hun (이병헌) plays both King Gwanghae and the [gisang house] comedian/jester/entertainer who resembles the king. The comedian is recruited by the Royal Secretary ( Ryoo Seung-Ryong 류승룡) to pretend to be the king at night because the king fears for his life.

I was pulled in by the movie's visuals to think over the plot and issues. Such a pretty movie. But of course they had certain scenes to make it a tearjerker! Did it deserve to win Best Picture for this year's Daejong Awards, though? I don't deny that it is a sentimental crowd-pleaser, as evidenced by its box office pull. (Is Pietà the better movie?) One might think that the jester's awkward infatuation with the queen is a misstep in the story, but it seemed plausible to me that this would happen, since the jester is both a man and also rather attached to the royal institution, despite the failures of the king to secure justice. He might be tempted to take his playacting too far, falling in love with the queen having seen how beautiful she is. And it is understandable that this infatuation could never be resolved to his satisfaction; the queen recognizes the goodness in him but is faithful to the king. It is a good movie for LBH fans and those who are interested in Korean cinema, but the story is a bit shallow and simplistic even if it provides material for reflecting on the Korean monarchy and political theory in general.

*spoiler warning*


Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Dr. Wilson, Jacobite sympathizer?

The One Over the Water:
Yet a real monarchist must admit that the British executed and exiled their legitimate kings. The Stuarts had defects enough, Heaven knows, but they were royal defects. They had the best of British qualities—courage and intelligence such as nearly conquered the world. Something went badly wrong when the present line of petty German princelings was imported. The German princes were among the stupidest and most repulsive of all the European royals and unfitted to be symbols of a great Empire.

Saturday, June 09, 2012

Been somewhat busy today; trying to clean after I found a most unwelcome visitor in my room. It was on one of the boxes and I was too slow in flushing it down the toilet so it disappeared again. Been trying to look for it in the house.

I had some thoughts about the British monarchy and the diamond jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II's coronation, along with the politickin' of the Vatican, but I may not have a chance to publish them. In the meantime...

Peter Hitchens, Pop goes the Monarchy: The Queen listened to Paul McCartney - and I heard the end of the Royal Family
Brendan O’Neill, The revolutionary potential of the Queen’s English

Thursday, December 16, 2010

To Kill a King

I watched this movie the other night -- I enjoyed it, maybe more for the spectacle than anything else, and I agree that it compresses too much into 1 hr and 47 minutes.

I really should read more about the English Civil War though -- any suggestions?

Fairfax, Cromwell et. al.: Republicans seeking to preserve that tradition in England? Or radical revolutionaries? The movie shows Fairfax to be more of the former, while Cromwell is more of the latter, even though the note at the end of the movie seems to support Cromwell, crediting him as a precursor to the French Revolution, which brought upon us the modern political age. (I don't think it was meant to be ironic. It states that a king was restored to the throne, and that England has not been a republic since.)

Apparently English Catholics tended to side with Charles I -- because he was Catholic? Or because they had a stronger affection for the monarchy, or were more loyal and obedient (as they understood those virtues)?

How should Catholics judge the Stuart cause? Could one support it without agreeing with his absolutist claims? And if the king denies that there are any legal limits to his authority, can anything be done to curb his power except by force (and maybe the installation of a new monarch)? And is it too radical for a society with a tradition of hereditary monarchy to cast it off in favor of a new method of appointing the monarchy?

An internet essay on the English Civil War.

Rotten Tomatoes (trailer)

youtube

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

The President should give his aunt a civics lesson

But you can only teach what you know: (AP) Obama's aunt says US obligated to make her citizen
What an entitlement complex, and it isn't limited to Obama's aunt (or Obama for that matter) -- the same could be said of all radical democrats (as defined by Plato and Aristotle). See John C. Médaille, On Democracy and Kings.

CNN: Bill Clinton on how he lost weight 
I can't stand the man, so I won't watch the video, but I'd be interested to read what low-carb proponents say about it.

Are dying languages worth saving? (via EB)

Mike Whitney, Housing: The Swelling Backlog

Also from Counterpunch:

John Ross, The Next Mexican Revolution 
Steve Breyman, The Myth That Kills