Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: royalcello

With all due respect, J.R.R. Tolkien had the example of the relatively amiable and harmless British royal family in mind. And although he says he is against democracy, he was not against the British constitution, which is a constitutional monarchy with significant democratic aspects. If an autocratic ruler were to become a tyrant, the people's only recourse would be to revolt. Democracy is a much saner and peaceful way for changes in government to be made.


93 posted on 12/12/2004 6:30:36 PM PST by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]


To: Unam Sanctam
"J.R.R. Tolkien had the example of the relatively amiable and harmless British royal family in mind."

Do you have any idea what Tolkien studied? LOL, he was definitely not a "modern" man - he was a master of ancient languages, history and anthropology. He knew exactly what he was endorsing.

98 posted on 12/12/2004 6:42:54 PM PST by kjvail (Judica me Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

To: Unam Sanctam; sitetest
Since Tolkien said that he favored "'unconstitutional' monarchy," he clearly had something rather different in mind than the modern powerless British monarchy, which has no practical ability to check democratic forces when they get out of control. Why is the tyranny of the mob preferable to the tyranny of a king? Are not the same human weaknesses that many kings have exhibited just as present in ordinary voters, with different but still unfortunate results? Yes, it is difficult to get rid of a bad king. But it is even more difficult to convert or get rid of a bad electorate. Without an effective monarchy and a real House of Lords (the latter destroyed by Tony Blair in 1999), how does one limit the power of the people in a country like Britain where a large majority apparently believe that foxhunting should be illegal but abortion should be legal?

(I do not know what HM Queen Elizabeth II's opinion on abortion is. However, it is clear that the royal family do not approve of the tyrannical fox-hunting ban, and the Queen has at least privately raised questions about the surrender of Britain's sovereignty to the EU. But given the modern era's worship of "democracy," there is nothing she can do.)

101 posted on 12/12/2004 6:47:39 PM PST by royalcello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

To: Unam Sanctam

Oh and I forgot if Tolkien had any doubts he could ask his closest friend CS Lewis - Chair of Midieval History at Cambridge.... ROFL.


102 posted on 12/12/2004 6:48:33 PM PST by kjvail (Judica me Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson