The politics of monarchy

The End of an Era: Queen Elizabeth II’s Passing and the Evolving Role of the Monarchy

The death of Queen Elizabeth II has not only marked the end of a historic 70-year reign but has also reignited profound discussions about the nature and future of the British monarchy in the 21st century. As the nation mourns a figurehead who embodied stability and continuity for generations, her son, now King Charles III, inherits a constitutional role that is both steeped in tradition and facing unprecedented scrutiny.

A Reign Defined by Duty and Transition

Queen Elizabeth II ascended to the throne in 1952, a period of post-war austerity and global geopolitical shifts. Her reign, the longest of any British monarch, spanned an era of immense social, technological, and political change. From the decline of the British Empire to the digital revolution, she remained a constant, embodying a sense of duty and service that resonated deeply with many across the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth.

Her passing on September 8, 2022, at the age of 96, triggered a period of national mourning and a surge of reflection on her legacy. The outpouring of grief and tributes, both domestically and internationally, underscored the unique position the Queen held in the global consciousness. Millions tuned in to witness the elaborate ceremonies surrounding her funeral, a testament to the enduring power of the institution she represented.

The Crown in the Modern Age: A Question of Fiction and Authority

Geoffrey Klempner, founder member of the International Society for Philosophers (ISFP), offers a unique perspective on the implications of Queen Elizabeth II’s death and the accession of King Charles III. He posits that monarchy, at its core, is a "fiction" – a construct that, while not based on divine right as in centuries past, holds significant cultural and societal weight.

"Royalty is a fiction," Klempner states, drawing a parallel to the historical dismantling of the ‘divine right of kings’ by figures like Oliver Cromwell. He acknowledges the prevailing narrative surrounding the concept of a "constitutional monarch" and notes that King Charles III has been quick to assure the public that he will respect the limitations of his role. However, Klempner challenges this perception, arguing that such assurances might stem from an "understandable error."

Charles III: A New Monarch, A New Mandate?

Klempner asserts that King Charles III is not bound by his mother’s historical precedent. "His Majesty is his own man," he contends, suggesting that the new monarch possesses a distinct opportunity to wield influence in a nation grappling with deep divisions. The current socio-economic climate, characterized by significant inequalities and political polarization, demands more than mere platitudes.

"Words and wishful sentiments are not enough to bring the country back to a sense of unity," Klempner observes. He argues that as King, Charles possesses an authority that he lacked as Prince of Wales. This authority, he believes, provides him with the "means and the power to influence events, to bring about change." This is not a "divine right," but rather an inherent prerogative of his position, independent of the whims of elected governments.

The Power of Influence: Beyond Law and Justice

While a constitutional monarch is traditionally understood to be a figurehead with limited executive power – unable to make laws or administer justice – Klempner argues that their words carry a "unique weight." In a robust democracy, the respect afforded to the "fiction of monarchy" does not inherently pose a threat of tyranny or undermine democratic will.

He draws upon John Stuart Mill’s observation of the "tyranny of the majority" in democratic systems. Klempner contends that the notion that power resides solely with elected representatives is a "fantasy." He highlights that individuals who command public attention, whether leaders of trade unions, captains of industry, or popular celebrities, wield considerable influence over public discourse and decision-making. In this context, the monarch occupies a "unique and irreplaceable" role in the national conversation.

Environmental Advocacy: A Precedent for Influence

Klempner points to King Charles III’s decades-long advocacy for environmental causes as evidence of his capacity for influence. "Decades ago, Charles was one of the first to speak out about the dangers to the climate and the environment," he recalls, noting that the then-Prince persevered despite considerable public and media criticism.

Now, as King, Klempner suggests that the "deep regard that the British people hold to the institution of monarchy" – evidenced by the widespread public reaction to his mother’s death – will likely lead to a significant silencing of past criticisms. This, he argues, grants him a "right and a duty to speak his mind."

The Paradox of Birthright and the "Way of Life"

The philosophical underpinning of this influence, stemming from an "accident of birth," presents a "puzzle." Klempner reiterates that the monarch’s power is a fiction, one that the public "happily subscribes to." He draws a parallel to religion, suggesting that while not literally true, religious practices and the respect for monarchy can be viewed as meaningful "ways of life" that individuals choose to engage with.

"To be religious, or to respect the authority of the monarch is a way of life that we find meaningful and worth believing in, even though we lack ‘belief’ in the strict and literal sense," he explains. This perspective challenges traditional political theory, which often focuses on the "obligation" to obey laws. Klempner posits that a more pertinent question is why one should listen to particular individuals or pronouncements, and where their "authority" to influence belief and action originates.

His answer lies in a combination of earned authority and voluntarily granted authority. Ultimately, this choice, he concludes, is an expression of a chosen "way of life."

Supporting Data and Public Sentiment

The immediate aftermath of Queen Elizabeth II’s death provided significant data on public sentiment. Polling by organizations such as YouGov and Ipsos MORI indicated overwhelmingly positive views of the late Queen’s service and dedication. A YouGov poll conducted shortly after her death found that 75% of Britons viewed her positively, with only 10% holding negative views. Similar sentiments were expressed across age groups, though younger demographics showed slightly less consistent support for the monarchy as an institution compared to older generations.

The sheer volume of public tributes, floral memorials, and the extended queues to view the Queen’s lying-in-state at Westminster Hall further illustrated the profound emotional connection many Britons felt towards the monarch. This collective experience of mourning highlighted the deep-seated respect for the institution and the individual who had embodied it for so long.

Official Responses and the Path Forward

Following the Queen’s death, the immediate official response was one of solemnity and continuity. The Accession Council, a formal body of advisors, swiftly proclaimed Charles as King. Prime Ministers from across the Commonwealth issued statements of condolence and paid tribute to the Queen’s lifelong service.

King Charles III’s first address to the nation, delivered shortly after his mother’s death, struck a tone of continuity and reassurance. He spoke of his mother’s unwavering commitment and pledged to uphold her legacy of service. He also acknowledged the grief of the nation and the challenges ahead, stating, "I know that the whole country, and I think I may say the whole world, sympathises with you in your great loss."

The government, under Prime Minister Liz Truss at the time, emphasized the importance of national unity during this period of transition. Parliamentary sessions were suspended for a period of mourning, and extensive plans were enacted for the state funeral, a meticulously orchestrated event designed to honor the Queen’s life and reign.

Implications for the Future of the Monarchy

The passing of Queen Elizabeth II presents a pivotal moment for the British monarchy. While the immediate outpouring of grief and respect for her reign suggests a continued public affinity for the institution, the long-term implications remain to be seen.

King Charles III inherits a monarchy that is both revered and questioned. His proactive stance on environmental issues, a cause he has championed for decades, signals a potential shift in the way the monarch engages with public discourse. As Klempner suggests, the current socio-political climate may necessitate a more engaged and influential royal presence, albeit within the confines of a constitutional framework.

The challenge for King Charles III will be to navigate the delicate balance between upholding tradition and adapting to the evolving expectations of a modern society. His ability to connect with a populace facing economic hardship and deep societal divisions, and to leverage the unique authority of his position for positive change, will be crucial in ensuring the continued relevance and support of the monarchy in the years to come. The "fiction" of monarchy, as Klempner describes it, will depend on its ability to remain meaningful and resonant for future generations.