![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
In this it states about the British glorious revolution of 1688, yet the designation British does not come in until the act of union 1707. Am I mistaken or should it be English instead of British? sorry if I'm wrong.
(RICHY) British usually refers to the island off Europe or historically to the peoples of the island (i.e. British or Brits). English is and relatively more recent and more political construct) (Richy) 95.151.146.164 ( talk) 23:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
User:Stijn Calle has changed both Royalist and Monarchism to record his opinion that the two concepts are different. I do not think these are minor edits. -- RichardVeryard 19:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
The International Monarchist League ("IML") and its recent child-organization The Australian Monarchist League ("AML") have not had a very high profile in Australia. Using the Trove website, I find one mention of the IML, it advertised once for members in 1970 in the Canberra Times. A google search does not lead to much reporting or other links for the IML. The AML has a slightly higher profile in Google, but nothing that indicates any support for the statement "The International Monarchist League, founded in 1943, which has been very influential in Canada and Australia". Even the Wikipedia page for IML fails to cite anything other than that a branch existed in Australia. In fact, it incorrectly states that the AML existed from 1943, it only became a separate entity around 1993. The wikipedia page for AML indicates that it was a bit player in a "No" vote coalition during the 1999 Republic referendum, otherwise no significant activity is indicated. The AML is a very small organisation, much smaller than the higher-profile and more active Australians For Constitutional Monarchy. There is no reference given for the statement of a "very influential" role of these Leagues in Australia. Therefore I am deleting the mention of Australia Brunswicknic ( talk) 11:51, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Might it be an idea to include a section about republics where there is popular support for restoring a monarchy? For example, according to a 2013 poll [1], more Serbs supported monarchism than opposed it, and Montenegro has passed a law giving an official non-political role to the former Montenegrin royal house. 62.171.197.110 ( talk) 15:54, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
In the section on monarchists from various countries, German politician Karl Josef Strauss is listed, but his biography does not associate him with monarchism, just conservatism. German monarchism seems largely tied to the house of Hohenzollern (Wilhelm I & II), so as a Bavarian, Strauss, for all his conservatism, might be understood as luke-warm about restoration of monarchism. At any rate, the claim of him as a monarchist seems to be unsupported as it stands. 2601:5C2:300:2361:B06C:6C51:BCB2:C35C ( talk) 23:16, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Should these advantages advanced by monarchists be listed as well?
Stability: monarchism prevents drastic changes in domestic and foreign policy whereas in a republic the path of a country can change drastically every election, meaning that some long term beneficial plans may not be implemented.
Competency of rulers: by knowing who in advance will rule a future monarch can be trained and educated on how to be good heads of state.
Avoids the corruption of an election: in some society's elections are seen as shams or can have allegations of fraud.
Emperor001 ( talk) 23:25, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
The impartiality of a monarch is ensured from its unelected charge so that he or she will act for the whole country and not just for his or her electors. Monarchy avoids a sizeable amount of corruption since presidents steal because they know that after some years they would be back home. Monarchy reduced extremist ideologies. Monarchy prevents executive dictatorships because the armed forces swear loyalty to the king and not to an eventual dictator as prime minister. Monarchies cost much less and significantly boost tourism. Public vote counts more in monarchies [2]. Monarchies are more capable to ensure long-term projects than republics because presidents act in the nearest immediate need. There are a lot more but I don’t want to have a complete list until I know that what I said has been considered. Egon20 ( talk) 22:24, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Also, monarchists resist democracy, there is a strong correlation between monarchy and anti-democracy. - Inowen ( nlfte) 04:50, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Most of monarchists want parliamentary monarchy. Do you know that public vote is more important in monarchies? [3] Egon20 ( talk) 22:28, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
The table in this section is flawed to say the least. The wording is misleading, suggesting that the "Supporters" column may be a number of declared supporters with the "% of country population" column based on the number from the "Supporters" column, when the opposite is actually the case. And hopefully it goes without saying that taking polling data and extrapolating it across the whole population to determine a theoretical number of supporters is not sound methodology. I also find issues with a number of sources:
In my view this section would be better off with the table removed and the numbers and specifics for each country listed in detail, with false information corrected where possible and removed where not. Erinthecute ( talk) 10:18, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
What's worst is that there are people using an even more "poll" obscure claiming 30% of the population of Brazil supports monarchism. Is there a way to stop this? Lucasmoorim ( talk) 22:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Royal central says 12 million Italians want the return of monarchy. We are 60 million Italians and if you calculate then 12 millions is the 20% of the population, not the 15%. Egon20 ( talk) 13:10, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Can you please restore the the old list but change a column from “% of the population” to “estimated % of the population”? The old list was far superior and much more accurate, only 30% for Georgia for instance is far too low, the sources provided out it at well over 50%. 2A02:C7F:1425:8B00:9089:2F8A:5109:42E4 ( talk) 03:03, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
This article only mentions arguments supporting monarchism. Anti-monarchist voices should have a section in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.152.125.89 ( talk) 18:00, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
This is the support for monarchy, a page called criticism of the monarchy already exists Egon20 ( talk) 23:34, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
No other ideology has a section dedicated to arguments in favour of it to my knowledge. There is already a page called "criticism of monarchy" so why shouldn't there be a "justifications of monarchy" page if people desire it. In my opinion all this section shows is bias and removal of this section would be for the best. Fale29 ( talk) 18:18, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
I propose that section Notable Monarchists be split into a separate page called List of monarchists. This section is particularly long compared to the other section and would fit in line with other lists of people who support different ideologies such as list of social democrats
@ Ad Orientem: Fale29 ( talk) 19:55, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
In this it states about the British glorious revolution of 1688, yet the designation British does not come in until the act of union 1707. Am I mistaken or should it be English instead of British? sorry if I'm wrong.
(RICHY) British usually refers to the island off Europe or historically to the peoples of the island (i.e. British or Brits). English is and relatively more recent and more political construct) (Richy) 95.151.146.164 ( talk) 23:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
User:Stijn Calle has changed both Royalist and Monarchism to record his opinion that the two concepts are different. I do not think these are minor edits. -- RichardVeryard 19:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
The International Monarchist League ("IML") and its recent child-organization The Australian Monarchist League ("AML") have not had a very high profile in Australia. Using the Trove website, I find one mention of the IML, it advertised once for members in 1970 in the Canberra Times. A google search does not lead to much reporting or other links for the IML. The AML has a slightly higher profile in Google, but nothing that indicates any support for the statement "The International Monarchist League, founded in 1943, which has been very influential in Canada and Australia". Even the Wikipedia page for IML fails to cite anything other than that a branch existed in Australia. In fact, it incorrectly states that the AML existed from 1943, it only became a separate entity around 1993. The wikipedia page for AML indicates that it was a bit player in a "No" vote coalition during the 1999 Republic referendum, otherwise no significant activity is indicated. The AML is a very small organisation, much smaller than the higher-profile and more active Australians For Constitutional Monarchy. There is no reference given for the statement of a "very influential" role of these Leagues in Australia. Therefore I am deleting the mention of Australia Brunswicknic ( talk) 11:51, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Might it be an idea to include a section about republics where there is popular support for restoring a monarchy? For example, according to a 2013 poll [1], more Serbs supported monarchism than opposed it, and Montenegro has passed a law giving an official non-political role to the former Montenegrin royal house. 62.171.197.110 ( talk) 15:54, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
In the section on monarchists from various countries, German politician Karl Josef Strauss is listed, but his biography does not associate him with monarchism, just conservatism. German monarchism seems largely tied to the house of Hohenzollern (Wilhelm I & II), so as a Bavarian, Strauss, for all his conservatism, might be understood as luke-warm about restoration of monarchism. At any rate, the claim of him as a monarchist seems to be unsupported as it stands. 2601:5C2:300:2361:B06C:6C51:BCB2:C35C ( talk) 23:16, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Should these advantages advanced by monarchists be listed as well?
Stability: monarchism prevents drastic changes in domestic and foreign policy whereas in a republic the path of a country can change drastically every election, meaning that some long term beneficial plans may not be implemented.
Competency of rulers: by knowing who in advance will rule a future monarch can be trained and educated on how to be good heads of state.
Avoids the corruption of an election: in some society's elections are seen as shams or can have allegations of fraud.
Emperor001 ( talk) 23:25, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
The impartiality of a monarch is ensured from its unelected charge so that he or she will act for the whole country and not just for his or her electors. Monarchy avoids a sizeable amount of corruption since presidents steal because they know that after some years they would be back home. Monarchy reduced extremist ideologies. Monarchy prevents executive dictatorships because the armed forces swear loyalty to the king and not to an eventual dictator as prime minister. Monarchies cost much less and significantly boost tourism. Public vote counts more in monarchies [2]. Monarchies are more capable to ensure long-term projects than republics because presidents act in the nearest immediate need. There are a lot more but I don’t want to have a complete list until I know that what I said has been considered. Egon20 ( talk) 22:24, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Also, monarchists resist democracy, there is a strong correlation between monarchy and anti-democracy. - Inowen ( nlfte) 04:50, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Most of monarchists want parliamentary monarchy. Do you know that public vote is more important in monarchies? [3] Egon20 ( talk) 22:28, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
The table in this section is flawed to say the least. The wording is misleading, suggesting that the "Supporters" column may be a number of declared supporters with the "% of country population" column based on the number from the "Supporters" column, when the opposite is actually the case. And hopefully it goes without saying that taking polling data and extrapolating it across the whole population to determine a theoretical number of supporters is not sound methodology. I also find issues with a number of sources:
In my view this section would be better off with the table removed and the numbers and specifics for each country listed in detail, with false information corrected where possible and removed where not. Erinthecute ( talk) 10:18, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
What's worst is that there are people using an even more "poll" obscure claiming 30% of the population of Brazil supports monarchism. Is there a way to stop this? Lucasmoorim ( talk) 22:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Royal central says 12 million Italians want the return of monarchy. We are 60 million Italians and if you calculate then 12 millions is the 20% of the population, not the 15%. Egon20 ( talk) 13:10, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Can you please restore the the old list but change a column from “% of the population” to “estimated % of the population”? The old list was far superior and much more accurate, only 30% for Georgia for instance is far too low, the sources provided out it at well over 50%. 2A02:C7F:1425:8B00:9089:2F8A:5109:42E4 ( talk) 03:03, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
This article only mentions arguments supporting monarchism. Anti-monarchist voices should have a section in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.152.125.89 ( talk) 18:00, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
This is the support for monarchy, a page called criticism of the monarchy already exists Egon20 ( talk) 23:34, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
No other ideology has a section dedicated to arguments in favour of it to my knowledge. There is already a page called "criticism of monarchy" so why shouldn't there be a "justifications of monarchy" page if people desire it. In my opinion all this section shows is bias and removal of this section would be for the best. Fale29 ( talk) 18:18, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
I propose that section Notable Monarchists be split into a separate page called List of monarchists. This section is particularly long compared to the other section and would fit in line with other lists of people who support different ideologies such as list of social democrats
@ Ad Orientem: Fale29 ( talk) 19:55, 16 April 2022 (UTC)