The Myth of Infantilism and the Monarchy Debunked

     One of the common criticisms of the monarchy that I have come upon is that it is somehow holding Britain back by infantilizing the people. In the minds of such malcontents, the United Kingdom – as well as other Commonwealth nations – cannot “grow up” into modern democratic societies so long as the monarchy is in existence. For them, the monarchy is incompatible with modernity and therefore has no place in modern Britain.

     To be fair, if Britain had no history and was just starting today, I doubt that a constitutional hereditary monarchy would be the first choice of a governmental foundation for the founding fathers of a new nation.

     But that is the point. Britain does have a history – a rich and illustrious history that stretches back thousands of years, and the monarchy has played a large role in that history.

     In the present, the monarchy can therefore be regarded as an inheritance – not just the inheritance of successive monarchs or members of the Royal family – but of all Britons, regardless of race, color, creed, origin, gender, or religion.

Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

     If you believe in the idea of the United Kingdom – of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales welded into a strong, single nation-state – and for that matter, the unity of the Commonwealth, then you have the Queen and the monarchy to thank for that. It provides a force that brings together and unifies disparate peoples, in spite of their differences; provides a measure of stability and continuity in a world that seems more chaotic every day; and it gives the people of Britain and the Commonwealth a yardstick of how far they have come, where they are, and were they are going in the passage of time.

     For all of its imperfections (all people and institutions have them), the monarchy works in Britain and in the Commonwealth countries were it retains its unique status. I feel the same way towards our own Constitution in the United States; for all of its flaws (not to mention the endless debate about what its provisions mean), it has generally worked well throughout our 230 year existence.

     It is highly disrespectful to tell the people of Britain – and for that matter, Canada, Australia, Jamaica, and the other realms with the Queen as head of state – that they are not a “grown-up” people, and living in a country that is not “grown-up.”

     I am also supremely doubtful that the same can be said about Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands – countries that are routinely held up as models for social justice and economic equality, but also have functioning monarchies.

     If anything, the monarchy has helped to advance technological and social progress. 

     In the past, members of the Royal family have been patrons of the arts and sciences who promoted good and useful works.

The Prince of Wales has worked hard to provide encouragement and inspiration to young people.

     In the present, Prince Charles’s vast array of organizations – such as the Prince’s Trust – have helped hundreds of thousands of young men and women to rise from their present – often lowly and tragic – circumstances, and to have faith in themselves to excel at something at which they are good. In this sense, the monarchy – contrary to keeping people down, has actually empowered them.

     Far from looking down on people, the Royal family actually looks up to people who have achieved success or have done good works in their communities, and who have inspired others by becoming positive role models. That’s why the monarchy recognizes such people by giving them awards to commend their achievements – people such as Andy Murray, Sean Connery, Richard Branson, Jessica Ennis-Hill, Adele, J.K. Rowling, Bradley Wiggins, and scores of other people who are not celebrities, but are hard-working individuals who make a positive difference to other people’s lives and in the wider society.

     If I were living in Britain and became a citizen/subject, I would be satisfied with living under the system of constitutional monarchy, in which I took part in the election of representatives to Parliament who form a government to solve the issues of the day, whilst the monarch is limited to the mostly formal and ceremonial duties of state – irrespective of partisan politics.

Politicians such as Prime Minister David Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg come and go throughout the years...

...but the monarchy is timeless, and there's something saying about that.

    

     I believe that the people who perpetuate the infantilizing myth do so in part because they are malcontent with the inability of the government to actually solve the problems that the country faces, and they attack the monarchy for (in their view) keeping people from understanding the stark realities of life in Britain and from owning up to Britain’s many problems – especially in the wake of the Great Recession and the economic slump.

     To them, I ask: “Is the monarchy keeping people from exercising their right to vote? Is it preventing people from becoming politically and civically active? Is it halting them from assembling and holding peaceful rallies to affect change in government policies? Is the monarchy stopping people from having freedom of thought, or of speech, or of the press?”

     The answer to all of those questions is a resounding NO. If anything, on the second question, members of the Royal family going back to Prince Albert – and even beyond – have encouraged more people to become educated and to take part in civic affairs. They have also expressed a general desire for more social cohesion and community-building, which is especially important in a Britain that has become increasingly diverse in several ways.

     The accusation of infantilism is an insult against the people’s collective intelligence, especially if they are the ones who are experiencing difficult times, and need not require any further reminding.

National celebration for the Diamond Jubilee produced no such infantilism. The celebrations showed Britain standing tall and proud of itself and its monarchy.

     Just as in the States, it is up to the people of the United Kingdom to exercise their democratic freedoms as part of the wider community of the realm and to express their will to the people they elected, and if that will is not being properly expressed in government policies, it is the right of the people to vote for other legislators to represent their collective interest.

     Britain has many issues it needs to confront, and it can do better, but abolishing the monarchy or accusing it of infantilizing the people is not the answer to Britain’s problems. (In other words, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!)

     The answer is for the people to get out and participate in the democratic process. Next year, the British people will have the opportunity to retain David Cameron as Prime Minister and elect a Conservative (Tory)-led government, or to replace him with Ed Miliband and the Labour Party. The monarchy cannot and will not stop that from happening, for if it did, there would be a constitutional crisis – possibly even a revolution – and it would not be pretty for anybody.

     The monarchy has not held back modernity; it has been part of modernity. Indeed, it has “grown up” with it.

The balance of tradition and modernity have become a hallmark of the monarchy.

     It has embraced modernity – not as quickly as some would like to see – but it has done so nonetheless. It has adapted with the times as necessary to keep up – throwing out old customs such as the presentation of debutantes, and creating new ones like widening the circle of people invited to garden parties. This is not the monarchy of William the Conqueror or Robert the Bruce; nor is it the monarchy of Elizabeth I of England or James VI & I; nor even is it the monarchy of George III or Queen Victoria. It is a modern monarchy for our times, while also retaining timeless, rich, and colorful rituals, such as the State Opening of Parliament, Trooping the Colour, and best of all – the Coronation.

     Celebrating the monarchy is not infantilism. It is an expression of national pride, on par with celebrating the UK’s success at the Olympics in 2012 or Andy Murray’s triumph at Wimbledon last year.

     People in Britain are not behaving like children by singing God Save the Queen – or for that matter, Land of Hope and Glory or Rule Britannia! They are celebrating an ancient institution that instills national pride and which represents what is good and decent about their country. Why else would 1.2 million people line up long the banks of the River Thames - in the rain, no less - for the Diamond Jubilee's River Pageant in support of the Queen?

     (Just for the record, only 500 anti-monarchists bothered to show up, and they were supremely outnumbered by people chanting: GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!)

Infantilism you say? I call it patriotic pride.

     Indeed, one of reasons I regard Britain with high esteem is due to the monarchy and the fact that it is still functioning and retains relevance in modern society. Of course, there is more to the UK than just the monarchy. As Hugh Grant said (in Love Actually), there's also Harry Potter, Sean Connery, David Beckham's right (and left) foot, as well as other things and people that make Britain unique amongst the nations of the world. The monarchy stands out for its role in forging the nation we know today and for continuing to help write its long island story.

     If it is true that the monarchy encourages infantilism, it is only because the malcontented monarchy-downers believe it to be so. They are the ones who convince themselves that they are inferior to the Royal family to the point that they feel ashamed of living in a country with a hereditary monarchy. THEY are the ones who are responsible for putting themselves in this position of inferiority and feeling like infants, not the monarchy.

     The people who believe in the United Kingdom and who take pride in its monarchy are the real “grown-ups” around here.

 

Photo Credit: Sodacan via Wikimedia Commons cc, Dan Marsh via Wikimedia Commons cc, UK in France via Flickr cc, Abuk SABUK via Wikimedia Commons cc, Ben via Flickr cc, Defence Images via Photopin cc