On the overthrow or endurance of kings

Abstract

Monarchy has two elements, autocratic government and hereditary succession to office. After surveying arguments for and against hereditary access to public office, the paper illustrates that theoretical explanations of the rise of representative government do not account for the abolition or preservation of hereditary monarchy in contemporary democratic states. The paper then distinguishes between proximate and fundamental causes of the fall of monarchy. The former are military defeat, dissolution of the state as a result of war defeat and decolonization, and revolution. Fundamental causes are those that explain how proximate causes led to the overthrow of the monarchy and focus on the failures of monarchs to preserve national unity and to withdraw from a politically active role.

Political Economy Perspectives of the Fall of the Greek Monarchy

“…"The central procedure of democracy is the selection of leaders through competitive elections by the people they govern." (Huntington, 1991, p.6) Inspecting the causes for the fall of monarchical regimes over the nineteenth and twentieth century, it is instructive to distinguish between proximate and ultimate causes (Tridimas, 2016 . Henceforth, a defeated monarch who retains the support of the coalition of interests that makes the ruling elite (the nobility in this case) and has no interest in changing the institution of monarchy, will also retain the throne.…”

Democratisation in Asia-Pacific Monarchies: Drivers and Impediments

“…desire to take the initiative and lead reform from the top, rather than wait for some future grassroots revolution. 128 Such a strategic approach aligns well with the concept of the "monarch's bargain" as described by Tridimas (2014Tridimas ( , 2016) (see 2.3). In such a bargain, a monarch assesses that it is best to give up political power in order to retain (for oneself and one's heirs) the ceremonial and status aspects (plus the financial benefits) of being head of state, rather than risk losing all.…”

“…Such monarchs promote democracy through what Tridimas (from an economic perspective) presents as a strategic bargain whereby the spoils are shared between the democratic government and the ceremonial monarchy. A second article by Tridimas (2016) postulates that when a monarch meddles in government, survival of the monarchy is less likely. Minoves-Triquell's survey of European monarchies comes to a similar conclusion (2011, p. 352).…”

“…A second article by Tridimas (2016), explores the more political motivations that might see the retention of a monarchy in a democratising state. Like Lipset, he suggests that a monarch might serve as a reassurance (to elites) that extreme policies might not succeed (p. 47); a ceremonial monarch can serve as a symbol of national unity.…”

“…As one interviewee commented, he was not even ready to meet the people half wayto retain status but not political power. 164 In other words, like his father Mahendra, he was not prepared to accept the reforming monarch's "bargain" (Tridimas, 2014(Tridimas, , 2016. His Vice Chair (during his absolute rule) stated that in Nepal monarchy and democracy were incompatible (Bhandari, 2014, p. 48).…”