Published: September 22nd 2024, 3:10:34 am
United Monarchist Party of America
So, this is a bonus dissection of the United Monarchist Party of America’s platform for my supporters on Patreon (you).
https://www.unitedmonarchistpartyofamerica.com/
As far as I can tell, UMPA is not actually a legitimate political party in the United States. It seems to be run by one guy and it’s not especially widespread or known by other people, but it has provided the most specific and thorough proposal for an American monarchy I’ve spotted so far. If you see any others, please share.
Anyways, UMPA’s website is a bit tricky to navigate, because it actually launders anything specific about having a monarchy, since it knows people don’t want, you know, an actual American king.
Anyways, let’s go page by page through the website.
The home page reads:
“
Our Mission and statement of Principles
We promote and defend monarchy as a legitimate form of government and completely reject the popular interpretation of said government as being equivalent or even related at all to the totalitarian dictatorships and despotisms of the 20th century.
We promote and defend education about monarchy and monarchism, particularly in opposition to the current school or university curriculums which are overly and unnecessarily critical of monarchy, especially in the United States.
We promote and defend the values and ethics of Noblesse Oblige; that those of high rank or high means have a great duty and responsibility to behave in gracious and generous ways towards those less fortunate.
We promote and defend the initiatives to repeal amendments 22, 17, and 16 of the United States constitution.
We promote and defend the initiative to increase the number of members of the House of Representatives from 435 members to at least 820 members.
We promote and defend an executive form of hereditary monarchy, otherwise known as semi-constitutional monarchy, to replace the Presidency in the United States, for the heir apparent to replace the Vice President of the United States, and for 10 seats in the Senate to be reserved only for the next 10 heirs of the blood, following the heir apparent, in the line of succession.
We promote and defend the initiative to increase the number of members of the Senate from 100 to at least 150 members, not including any reserved Imperial seats.
We promote and defend the rights of religious liberty and toleration in the United States and acknowledge and support the settlement laid out in the constitution regarding freedom of religion.
We promote and defend the initiative that the monarchy established in the United States should be a sacerdotal one, as such they shall receive the rites of anointing and crowning in a sacred and religious coronation ceremony. We defend this move as not incompatible with any notion of religion freedom because the religion of the monarchy and the dynasty shall not be mandated as required by any state, citizens, or the country at large.
We promote and defend the initiative to establish a system of hereditary honors and nobility for great deeds done on behalf of the country, our people, and the monarchy, and that such individuals be granted sufficient rewards and subsidies for themselves and their posterity.
“
So, right from the start, there’s coping. UMPA blames “current school or university curriculums” for being “overly and unnecessarily critical of monarchy.” This is a cope. The United States has opposed monarch since the 1770s, and trying to lump in some tired critique of Woke Universities or the Cathedral [Curtis Yarvin] is deception. And, also, I don’t think American education is “overly” or “unnecessarily” critical of monarchy—I think monarchy, a corrupt form of government which we have thankfully moved beyond, thus bringing in the prosperity and successes of the modern world—deserves all the condemnation and derision it gets, thanks!
Point 4 reads: “We promote and defend the initiatives to repeal amendments 22, 17, and 16 of the United States constitution.”
Amendment 22 puts term limits on the presidency, so fair. Amendment 17 is direct election of United States Senators, which from my point of view is a pretty good amendment, allowing we the people to have greater say in the people whose job it is to represent us, but if you’re a monarchist, at least this makes sense within your ideological framework. Then, Amendment 16, believe it or not, allows an income tax.
Which is hilarious.
Now, a lot of monarchists actually come from libertarianism, including the biggest American monarchist, Curtis Yarvin. Libertarians, realizing that they can’t abolish the Woke World Order—and that dastardly income tax—through weakening the government, sometimes go the exact opposite way. Curtis Yarvin, for example, is a radical right totalitarian. He describes himself as further right than the Nazis. Interestingly, his parents were communist immigrants, so it seems he inherited their beliefs, just with a special twist.
Anyways, where was I?
Oh, right:
Point 5 reads: “We promote and defend the initiative to increase the number of members of the House of Representatives from 435 members to at least 820 members.” This is actually a good idea, but I imagine UMPA has some strange plan on what to do with those extra representatives. In any case, the Founding Fathers intended the representatives of the House to, you know, actually represent the wills and interests of their communities. As it currently stands, House members cannot do so, as their communities are simply too large. Think of this: do you know who your Congressperson is? Have you talked to them? Do they really represent your community?
Ok, then point 6—six!—actually discusses monarchy. It reads: “We promote and defend an executive form of hereditary monarchy, otherwise known as semi-constitutional monarchy, to replace the Presidency in the United States, for the heir apparent to replace the Vice President of the United States, and for 10 seats in the Senate to be reserved only for the next 10 heirs of the blood, following the heir apparent, in the line of succession.”
So, this is ridiculous. First, as I talk about in the main video on Lavader, monarchy is simply a bad form of government, especially hereditary monarchy—i.e., basically every monarchy. What if you get stuck with a bad king? You just have to deal with it for 30 years, or until someone shoots him? That’s hardly a good government system.
Also, reserving 10 seats in the Senate for the family members of the president is ridiculous too. You really want to give Billy Bush or Tiffany Trump a seat in the United States Senate? Well, I suppose if we had this form the start they may be people of higher esteem, like Prince Andrew.
Point 8 reads: “We promote and defend the rights of religious liberty and toleration in the United States and acknowledge and support the settlement laid out in the constitution regarding freedom of religion.”
Oh, great.
Point 9 reads:
“We promote and defend the initiative that the monarchy established in the United States should be a sacerdotal one, as such they shall receive the rites of anointing and crowning in a sacred and religious coronation ceremony. We defend this move as not incompatible with any notion of religion freedom because the religion of the monarchy and the dynasty shall not be mandated as required by any state, citizens, or the country at large.”
So you don’t support religious liberty and freedom? Because, as the US Constitution reads, the government cannot promote or establish a state religion. Mandating your king to be a religious king who performs religious rituals is, in fact, breaking the boundary between the church and state. What religious ceremony is he going to be doing, UMPA? Christian, I presume? Which denomination??
Anyways, that’s the home page of UMPA.
Let’s go to: https://www.unitedmonarchistpartyofamerica.com/current-issues
Among the many key issues UMPA mentions on this page are dying communities, a vanishing middle class, high and unfair taxes, and outdated and decaying infrastructure. UMPA’s solution? Giving America a king! Yep, because a king will somehow be able to cure America of these problems. Genius, just genius. That’s like saying, “Gee, America has a problem with drugs. My answer? Abolish the Supreme Court!” There’s no relation! This won’t solve the problem! It’s a distraction, it’s riding another issue’s coattails to try to get your voice heard.
On this webpage, https://www.unitedmonarchistpartyofamerica.com/our-missions-and-commitments here are UMPA’s missions and commitments: funding mass transit, urban restoration, supporting American industry, tax reform, supporting local farmers, and then all the way at the bottom they mention wanting a monarchy! Why are you so scared? Just delete all the other crap and talk about the king! That’s your whole thing! Why are you talking about farms!!! You are the United Monarchist Party of America and you’re scared of talking about wanting a monarchy? This is ludicrous.
Ok, maybe I’m being unfair. UMPA also mentions some other key issues in America: political deadlock and extreme division. Let’s see how they think a king can help. At the bottom of the page, behind a link, is this page:
https://www.unitedmonarchistpartyofamerica.com/an-american-monarchy
Ok, finally we get to the juicy part of the website.
First, UMPA criticizes democracy:
“The word democracy has also been used as a synonym for representation, or even liberty, and indeed
many use the word in this way, despite being arguably incorrect. Democracy is not a guarantee of
representation or even liberty. Democracies can, like any other government, be illiberal; a democracy
can devolve into Mob rule or Majority tyranny where the ascendant majority will brutalize, suppress,
and oppress any and all minorities.”
I’m so tired of these snarky, know-it-all criticisms of democracy. Ok, genius, as you wish: from now on, every time I say democracy, I’ll say “liberal, representative democracy, with a strong rule of law.” Too much? Ok, then let’s just say democracy. Because really, the way everyone uses the word except know-it-alls, it includes representation and liberal rule of law, because that’s the form democracy takes in the West. Nobody truly considers Russia, an illiberal democracy where being an opposition leader can get you literally sent to Siberia, a true democracy.
UMPA adds:
“Democracy, while having a defined structure, has a defined process and is really just a means to an end,
it is a frame not a picture. For instance, if a majority voted for a Communist party, or a Nazi party, or
Anarchist party, then that country is going to become Communist, Nazi, or witness the complete
collapse of central authority all Democratically! The adverb of the word democracy describes its process, but that process has no director or painter, and the baton or the brush can be claimed by anyone, however unpleasant. Democracies naturally grow out of themselves Division, Populism, and
Demagogues. Democracy produces what threatens it, poisons it, and inevitably will kill it.”
What a genius critique of democracy! Surely UMPA is the first to notice this? Surely this is a massive vulnerability in the United States Constitution! Nope, there are checks and balances and limitations on the power of the federal government. If you plucked Hitler from Nazi Germany and put him into the White House, what would you have? Well, Congress would remove him from office. What if you get King Hitler, UMPA? What would you do then? Remove him from office? Oh, okay, so the chief executive needs limitations and balances on his power? Then why not just have an elected chief executive? A president, even?
Next, UMPA says:
“Monarchy, through its hereditary aspect, is naturally A-political. They are impartial and are not compromised by partisanship and faction. The monarch having inherited their position doesn’t need to fight for that authority in elections, and therefore they stand above faction, party, and political maneuvers to view all decisions they make from a very broad perspective. As such they are in the best position to act in a universal and ecumenical way, and with equal favor towards all of the citizens and regions of their country.”
Monarchism is just pure fantasy, it really is. The monarchy is apolitical? Gosh, I really wish someone told that to Tsar Nicholas! I really wish someone got the letter to King Louis’s executioner! Monarchists are just delusional, it’s a delusional fantasy. No. Giving power to 1 man for life is not lifting him above politics. It’s taking what monarchists believe should be an apolitical symbol of national unity and sinking him in the mud and muck of partisan politics. What if nobody like the king, which has happened plenty of times throughout history? Ok, what’s the answer the people are going to take when he makes a terrible mistake? Well, they can’t vote him out of office, because “elections are naturally divisive” according to UMPA. The solution the people will take, which has happened over and over throughout history, is to resort to bloody revolution. And that’s why Nicholas and his children are dead. Monarchism killed the monarchy.
UMPA next says: “Monarchy is like having a living flag or a personification of the country, its history, and its culture. Their family and ancestors were present long before many of our families either emigrated to the country or even came into exitance. Their person is rooted in the very soil of the nation itself. The buildings, cities, and monuments seen around might have been financed by one of their ancestors, and in that way, we greatly benefit from that historical patronage. A Royal Family and a country are often very intimately connected. Monarchs however also possess an “international” flavor to them, as Royal Families tended to marry outside their realms, forging connections with many other families and dynasties from many other various backgrounds, cultures, religions, and histories.”
This is hilarious. Ah yes, definitely, monarchy is a personification of the country, its history, and its culture—tradition! But also there international, oftentimes foreign, and they’re definition above you and me and everyone else in the country. Yeah, what do you call giving someone, sometimes without personal connection to the country, executive power and military command over the country? I call that an occupation.
UMPA next says: “Monarchy is also like a trade or apprenticeship. Education in the art has been seen from the earliest times of royalist political philosophy to be crucial for any future monarch to be successful. Being educated in languages, law, literature, diplomacy, etiquette, philosophy, history, politics, rhetoric, mathematics, the Arts, etc. as well as performing duties in military service would not be an uncommon regiment as a “monarch in training.” Proper education, along with checks and balances as outlined in later developed political theory, were seen as a bulwark against the potential for any tyranny, from either a monarch, an assembly, or other institutions. This educational ideal is also responsible for philosopher and sage Kings; royals who patronized the arts and sciences and commissioned some of the best architects, artists, thinkers, and scientists who have left behind a tremendous legacy, monarchs who founded museums and universities, who invested in various profitable farsighted ventures, who subsidized industries, who promoted merit and outstanding individuals, etc. Taking inspiration from the Platonic dialogues, one can read the “Ship” allegory; that a country is like a ship, would you want just anyone to steer the vessel or those educated in how to sail? Why therefore, would the choice be different for those that steer the ship of state?”
Yeah, I suppose it’s nice to have someone very well educated be the chief executive of a country. But guess what? Most chief executives already are! Literally, modern day public school education in a wealthy area—the type that most politicians grow up in—is better than what a rich person 500 years ago would expect. Okay, you say, that’s kind of a weak argument—surely modern-day princes attend even better education? Yeah, they go to the best schools in their countries. Guess what? So do elected leaders! King Charles went to Trinity College. He wasn’t tutored by Aristotle, he went to a nice university! We don’t need a monarchy to get a smart person in the job. Just vote for smart people, there are plenty of them!
Next, UMPA says: “Monarchs are able to draw loyalty and support from a very wide range of peoples, religions, cultures, ages, and political affiliations within the country. Such a thing is impossible for most if not all presidents or Prime ministers; that focus of support and loyalty for the monarchy is coming from an entirely different angle and almost defies conventional logic. Because why should people hold greater support for a person for whom they have not directly voted vs a person they have? This loyalty given to the Royal authority is rooted in so many various sentiments and emotions. There exists a certain amount of love, of affection, of admiration, of trust, and of respect in and for that authority; it is a personal and emotional connection.”
This is pure fantasy again. The reason modern day European monarchies can get so much support from so many different types of people is because they actually don’t do anything. They just wave around, get painted, so on. You really think King Charles would be so popular if he actually had to appoint government ministers, if he had to decide how to handle immigration? You really think Queen Lizzy’s holy image would survive deciding whether or not to lock Britain down to Covid? No, I can understand the argument monarchies can be symbols of unity, but that only works if you keep them far, far from partisan politics. And, necessarily, that means they can have no political power.
Ok, let’s go to UMPA’s FAQ page. https://www.unitedmonarchistpartyofamerica.com/faq
The first question, as expected, is “How will a monarchy be established?”
Then UMPA says: “We’d get the Congress to call a new constitutional convention, the second this country would ever have, and draft amendments, corrections, and clarifications to the present constitution. Probably also drafting an entirely new document, a second constitution, that would contain all of the clauses and phrases from the amendments to the first one, and have any future amendments start from the beginning again. We wouldn’t get rid of the original constitution at all, it would simply be easier to streamline the document and draft a second copy to be referenced moving forward than sift through it and 30+ amendments.”
Yeah, what did I expect? There’s no actual plan, just “well, we’d need to start over” because obviously you’d just have to start over. A practical American monarchist would just support a dictator, which is what Curtis Yarvin does.
Next, UMPA answers: “Who will be the Monarch?”
UMPA says: I dunno. But they do have some ideas: “It can’t just be anyone. What legitimacy would one average person have over hundreds of millions of other average people? Well, they don’t, so the list must be specific. The only people omitted from the list and from being chosen would be admins of this party, and any past, present, and future politicians of the United States. However, the list does include descendants of the more prominent founding fathers, as well as members of reigning and deposed monarchies. Royals have been living in the United States for a long while, in some case for 3 generations or more, many have been born here, have citizenship not only by birth, but they’ve lived in the United States most of their lives if not still, they were educated here, went to university here, had their children here etc.”
Gosh, it’s very easy to just fantasize about a nonpartisan, national unifying king when you avoid actually saying who it would be. As soon as you provide a name, that’s when reality starts to hit, so definitely don’t do it.
Anyways, UMPA spends much more brain power discussing farm surplus trading, reindustrialization, and urban reformation, since those are actual things that can be done in this timeline and not a timeline that diverged from ours 300 years ago.
He does make some book recommendations, at the end, including Star-Spangled Crown, which I hadn’t heard of before. So thanks, I suppose.
Anyways, don’t forget to check out the main video when it drops, and if you’d like more of these Patreon-exclusive rants, let me know in the comments. Thanks for the support!