







You read that correctly: Monarchy is a much better system than democracy. Confused? But what about one person having ultimate power? Hereditary succession? Complete rule over the people? Don’t worry, we’ll go over all of that. The first and most important part for the reader is to understand the etymology and linguistic literalness of words with the root -archy, or “arch”.

“Arch” comes from the Greek ‘arkhos‘ which means ‘chief’, or ‘ruler’ in English. The prefix ‘an’ means without (an-archy meaning ‘without rulers’), and ‘mon’, stemming from ‘monos’, which means ‘one’ or ‘alone’ (mon-archy meaning ‘one ruler’ or ‘lone ruler’).

Americans often equate democracy with freedom. They figure that, because they are ultimately afforded an opportunity to cast their opinion at a ballot box, this gives them some sort of power. Unfortunately, while democracy’s etymology is still Greek, its name stems from the ancient Greek philosopher Democritus, whose very name means ‘chosen of the people’. However, when we view democracy from an outside perspective, we realize that it only really means the majority rules. Ultimately, a hyperbolic oligarchy, or mob rule.

Thanks to the founding fathers’ ingenuity and political maturity, they were acutely aware of this situation and established a Republic, or a representative democracy. This is why we vote people to represent us and vote for us in congress and have an electoral college. That being said, the founding fathers were also aware that most Americans did not have the political acumen to make federal, state, or even township decisions. It was clear that at the country’s founding, only those who specialized in a political field were deemed qualified to participate in it.









The problem, is, even in a representative democracy, the decision lays ultimately to people who do not have the acumen to make political decisions, and this is clearly reflected in the representatives they choose. It’s difficult for people who are not consistently exposed to politics to pick up on superficiality in campaigns and adverts. This does not mean they are stupid, it merely means they do not specialize in politics. However, in the end, it means that it is easy for people who also have no political acumen, but are popular and good motivators, to also get elected.

In addition, this creates ripe ground for corruption. When a politician is only in office for a few years, they have very little interest in the long run result of their political objectives, or “drive by legislation”. Politicians know that whatever short comings their legislation has on their locale will be blamed on their successors. In the end, you will have a false facade of politicians with a “long history of accomplishment”, because they simply got the bill passed, not because it was good for their constituents.

Monarchy is the privatization of the government estate. All decisions are made by one person, and why is this good? Because there’s only one person that needs to be held accountable. In congress they play the “refer to this department”, “it was this director’s responsibility”, “I defer any questions to the FBI”; in a monarchy this stops.

Dictatorship? Historically, most monarchies have set up constitutions to keep future power in order. Hereditary succession? Wouldn’t you want somebody in power who was groomed at birth on how to run a nation? In ancient times, there were Kings and Queens as young as 13 years old that ran complicated empires. Corruption? If a monarch is endowed everything at birth, and is not concerned with losing power, why would he be inclined to be malicious?

When one is in office for only 4 years, or sometimes 8, why would they be concerned with the longevity of their country? A monarchy would have a much higher propensity to be benevolent. If a monarchy already has ultimate power, and essentially owns the government estate for life, wouldn’t they have an interest in keeping it pleasant? They remain in power as long as there isn’t a violent revolution, so wouldn’t it behoove the monarch to make decisions that benefit his people?

In conclusion; western civilization was built on monarchy, and it is a system as old as the Mesopotamia. Even today, countries with monarchies are more stable and their leaders are more revered, where democracies often remain stagnant and create wish wash legislation that pleases nobody.