Loic
|
Primogeniture and the MonarchyAnd so the Chrysanthemum throne has been saved from the horrible prospect of (gasp) a woman ascending the throne. The knight, who isn't exactly yet in shining armour, has yet to emerge from the hospital where he was delivered but experts can safely say that he'd instead be shrouded in a blue cloth.
For those who are even dimly aware of the succession crisis in Japan, you must first know that Salic Law in Japan continues to reign supreme. For the unintiated, Salic Law is basically an advanced form of primogeniture that expressly forbids women from ascending the throne as long as there is a surviving, albeit distant, male pretender to the throne.
This quirk was exploited by the state of Hanover to deny Queen Victoria from inheriting the title of Grand Elector of Hanover when she became Queen of Great Britain.
On the other hand, primogeniture laws simply favour the oldest male offspring. In the absence of any sons, daughters are substituted.
Japan adheres to a strict form of Salic law. The Crown Princess created a buzz a few years ago when she was pregnant. Unfortunately, the Havard-educated Princess gave birth to a baby girl. Legislators were prepared to enact laws to pave the way for a possible female succession. However, these plans were stymied by the announcement of Princess Kiko (sister-in-law of the Crown Prince) 's pregnancy. Traditionalists were happy that the status quo would not rocked while the progressives were also happy as they did not want to rock the boat.
Anyway, Princess Kiko delivered a boy yesterday, thereby ensuring continuity for the next two generations. As the conservatives had hoped, this has brought an end to the debate on whether the constitution should be revised to favour the possibility of a woman becoming Empress.
This is interesting food for thought and reflects to a large degree how patriarchial attitudes die hard. Personally, I am in favour of simple primogeniture in which case, the oldest daughter of the current Crown Prince would become the future head of state.
The Japanese monarchy is the most ancient in the world and beats hands down the lofty claims by the House of Windsor that the Queen can trace her lineage all the way back to William the Conquerer. But well, Wills only landed in England in 1066, didn't he?
Prince Akishino, Japan's answer to Banquo - he would never be king while his sons and descendants would be.
|
Uriel
|
And yet Japanese emperors like to trace their ancestry (and authority) back to Amaterasu, the sun goddess.
Silly, isn't it?
I know many people in countries that have monarchies are emotionally attached to them, but I just can't see the purpose of a monarch, no matter what accident of birth leads to their selection. It's just a strange concept to me, that you can be born into a role in life.
|
Loic
|
I agree with you to a certain extent. However, I'd rather have a just and wise king over a sleazy and corrupt President who is beholden to the electorate which has voted him into office.
I have no objections to the notion of inherited privilege. You do not need to be born into a royal household to inherit privilege; many of us here are all born into some sort of privilege or another. Many of us are also born into a role in life. I am the oldest son in my family and I am frequently called upon to do duties which my younger sibling doesn't. Is being born into a predestined role that strange or even odious to you, Uriel? Isn't your role as a daughter determined by external circumstances as well?
That said, I wear a monarchist coat if the monarch commands my personal esteem; I wear republican colours if he behaves like a little Hitler.
It is the person and not the institution that determines if such an idea will continue to remain viable in the next few centuries. The monarchy has served a crucial role in many situations. Many of them are groomed to assume the mantle of ceremonial leadership from young and as such, exude a rarefied form of grace and polish which might be lacking in a democratically elected President from a working class background.
|
Fredrik
|
And it's not like most modern monarchies are "by the grace of God". Most European monarchies, with the notable exception of Denmark, has had republican moments at some point and thrown off the yoke of divine monarchy at some point, only to re-adopt it as a sort of hereditary presidency with office holders from a special family.
|
Uriel
|
| Quote: | | I have no objections to the notion of inherited privilege. You do not need to be born into a royal household to inherit privilege; many of us here are all born into some sort of privilege or another. Many of us are also born into a role in life. I am the oldest son in my family and I am frequently called upon to do duties which my younger sibling doesn't. |
I don't think that's as common around here, unless they are age-specific duties that a younger sibling is not old enough to perform yet. Once they grow up, though, all siblings should be expected to perform the same roles and duties, regardless of their birth order.
| Quote: | | Is being born into a predestined role that strange or even odious to you, Uriel? |
I think so. What if you don't want that role? What if another person is more qualified for it, but denied the opportunity because of factors beyond his control, like parentage?
I think that's the key: opportunity. Not everyone will succeed the same way, but all people should have the same opportunities. Opportunities should not be denied to some and awarded to others on a non-merit basis like accident of birth. I know that this is somewhat idealistic and people will suffer irrational discrimination based on factors they can't control, like race or sex, but that doesn't make it right.
| Quote: | | Isn't your role as a daughter determined by external circumstances as well? |
Such as what?
|
|
|
|