Login

u/Capta1n_Dino

Image 1 — What is your view of the Jacobitism?
Image 2 — What is your view of the Jacobitism?
Image 3 — What is your view of the Jacobitism?
▲ 68 r/monarchism

What is your view of the Jacobitism?

My view of the Jacobitism is quite sympathetic personally, for a few reasons:

  1. I strongly believe that James II/VII was a legitimate King of England and Scotland. I don't think you can seriously argue against that. His daughter and her husband effectively usurped his throne, especially after he had a son, meaning that she wasn't even the first in line.

  2. It led to the union of the crowns of England and Scotland, because the Scottish protested the right of the English to just usurp their throne and then force this on Scotland. This is why many Scottish Highlanders, despite being Protestants, supported James VII as rightful King of Scotland. I strongly agree with this, as it aligns with the principle of subsidiarity and localism, the Scottish absolutely had the right to chose their rightful monarch and not have the English Parliament force it upon them.

  3. James II was largely forced out because of his attitude towards religion. He used royal powers to get rid of a lot of the anti Catholic laws in the British Isles. This is the main reason he had a lot of support from the Irish, who had faced heavy oppression at the hands of English Protestants. Obviously, as a Catholic, I am biased here, however I think it's hard to argue against this when you consider that James II was doing what a just monarch should do, that is using his authority to remove what are objectively unjust laws.

  4. It set the principle of Parliament having power over the King in England and later the United Kingdom. I personally believe this was a mistake, since I lean more towards absolutism, so I do not believe Parliament should have this authority, but I think those of you who strongly support constitutional monarchy might disagree here.

u/Capta1n_Dino — 9 days ago
▲ 59 r/monarchism

What are your thoughts on the Iraqi Monarchy?

King Faisal II was killed in 1958 by a military coup, led by Abd al-Karim Qasim and other nationalist officers who were inspired by the rise in Arab nationalism and anti colonial sentiment. Many other members of the Royal family were also killed, after they surrendered to the military, believing they'd be safely escorted. Ironically Qasim was later overthrown in another coup in 1963.

They are close relatives of the Jordanian monarchy too. The current head of the Iraqi branch of the Hashemite house is Prince Ra'ad Bin Zeid.

u/Capta1n_Dino — 16 days ago
▲ 22 r/monarchism

If the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem were restored, which dynasty would you support making monarch? The ones I've put in the poll above are all those who carry the title "King of Jerusalem". I personally would support the Habsburgs.

View Poll

reddit.com
u/Capta1n_Dino — 24 days ago
▲ 20 r/monarchism

As an Indian and a monarchist, this is something I have wondered about. I am not really sure who would realistically be restored. I believe monarchy is the ideal form of government, but in the Indian context it’s hard to say who would actually be a King should the country attempt to restore someone.

The most obvious one immediately would be to restore the House of Windsor and become a Commonwealth realm. They were the last Kings of India officially. However, this would face massive resistance, and be politically impossible. It would be seen as undoing independence and as foreign domination, even with strict constitutional limits and all the benefits monarchy brings. So while the historical claim is strong, practically it would be impossible.

Now, India has many royal houses and dynasties, a legacy of the princely states system of British India. They even had some official legal recognition until the 1970s, though no legal authority since independence. Many of these houses have recognised descendants and heads, many even hold political office, but the main issue is here you could not realistically crown one as King of all of India, since they are tied to specific regions, religious traditions, and dynasties that do not represent the entire country. Rather, if we were to restore these houses, I think they would have to be regional leaders, potentially with an elective system of monarchy, where one of the princes is elected by the other to be King or Emperor of India. It could be a HRE style system, but this would be very complicated to do.

Beyond this, the last native Indian dynasty to rule all of India was the Mughals. Even this is already hard, modern Indian politics debates whether the Mughals were truly native or if they were early colonisers, unfortunately political narratives don’t allow the kind of nuance necessary to understand the transformation of medieval dynasties, but oh well. Moving beyond that, the main issue is there is no single recognised claimant to the Mughal line. They have descendants for sure, but they are impoverished, scattered, and lack any real way to prove their genealogies, assuming they are even aware of them, which most likely aren’t. The British did effectively destroy this line. They are also Islamic, which is politically explosive in India today.

So now the final option is that someone pulls a Napoleon or Caesar and we get a monarchy that way.

If you guy have any more insights and thoughts they would be much appreciated.

reddit.com
u/Capta1n_Dino — 25 days ago