It is not the first assumption of people that monarchy is a way to peace, but it is certainly something that must be considered and discussed, especially in light of the recent tensions the republican governments have created.
In the days of the past, the same ones that detractors use as their evidence that monarchy is unsuitable to the modern world, kings might have gone to war for any number of reasons. This was the nature of the time. It was not only monarchies that did so. Warfare used to be a very different concept than it is now. Men threw themselves into the thought of war for ‘king and country’ or for ‘freedom and liberty’. It was an honor to serve and sometimes, this honor was even acknowledged by the ruling head of a government.
This desire to prove oneself in battle has not diminished, and within the traditionalist groups in the modern world, is still heralded as the mark of a good man. However, unlike other traits of true and virtuous life such as raising a family or respecting one’s betters that can be practiced in the modern world, despite the odd looks from degenerates, valor through military service is hindered by the environment in which we find ourselves.
A virtuous soldier must be part of a virtuous war. One cannot be worthy of distinction by taking part in a battle that is, in and of itself, not graced by logical reasoning. Beyond the battle against the Islamic State, there is no true battle in the modern world. As the battle against the Islamic State involves several unvirtuous and unjust aspects, it is tainted, as are those who take place in it.
The West (including Russia), have decided to devote themselves to the military posturing that is a trend in governments in which democracy has naturally decayed. While the Democratic Peace Theory tries to dissuade this reality, we can take a quick summary of all the current and fermenting conflicts on Earth and see for ourselves that there is nothing that is worth sacrificing oneself for.
The drive that America, Russia, and China have been making towards bringing us, once again, to the brink of nuclear war is based on the concept that each nation must have -and you must forgive my blunt language- the biggest dick. It is a symptom of humanity that is ancient in its history, and perhaps a bit silly when analyzed by the logical, but one that is generally acceptable. Evolutionarily speaking, we strive to prove that we are the best within a defined area. It is not unnatural and is rarely fatal. The duels of the past have moved on to the wars of the present, however, and this is where the natural mutates into the artificial and becomes a threat to the security and wellbeing of those who call themselves sane and just.
There is no true reason that America must continue its interference in the Middle East, South Chinese Sea, and Eastern Europe, no just reason that China must claim the entire South Chinese Sea, and no logical reason that Russia must press itself ever more into international affairs.
When nations feel as though they must prove something to their people and to the world, it endangers all of us and is something that truly should have been left in the past.
Monarchy, by nature, seeks that which harmonizes the state, the land, and the people. As the world has evolved, there have been changes for good and for ill, and it is here that we find the good, and use it as a further example of why monarchy is the most logical and safest route for humanity. There is no reason that a monarch, directly responsible for and to the people, would ever decide to intervene in any of the modern conflicts that ravage our planet. A king must be willing to fight to protect his people and his nation, that is his duty, his burden, but there is no sense in sending his people to die in foreign wars that serve no interests except for those of the few. A monarch might feel that it is important, or even divinely ordained that they should fight the Islamic State, but would be unlikely to support other terrorists to do so. Equally ludicrous would be the idea of toppling a legitimate government in order to maintain influence in a region. A monarch understands that foreign leaders are not likely to kill them, but their own people will be ever ready to express their displeasure through violence, if it is necessary.
As the path of the inept and destructive democracies that currently reign over so many lives continues to remain firmly in the direction of destruction, annihilation, and death, not only of morals and ethics, but of lives and safety, it is ever more imperative that people find safety in the forms of government that will prevent such needless atrocities. Western monarchy is a safe haven for our morality and can be a fortress for our very lives, if people are bold enough to reject needless war and interventionism.