Looking for an American King? Try Another Brit.
“If a B-listed actor from Hollywood can win the Cold War, imagine what a spare prince from England could do. Given his family history, he might even be able to kick Russia out of Ukraine. Queen Victoria did it—why wouldn’t Harry?”
The Supreme Court is right. Democracy has run its course. It’s time to bring back the king, equipped with divine rights, immune from prosecution and flying high above the law. The big advantage for voters? We can finally get rid of the Electoral College — and New Yorkers need no longer fret about the fact their fellow Americans in North Dakota have three times more voting power. There is a precedent in European history, and it involves one of the continent’s usual suspects: in 1806, Napoleon, with a stroke of his Sharpie, dissolved the college of prince electors that had chosen the Holy Roman Emperor for half a millennium, put himself in the Emperor’s place and replaced the princes with his brothers. That’s what you can do when you enjoy full immunity. No need for brothers, by the way. You can also fill key positions in the imperial household with your sons, daughter and son-in-law.
And what’s in it for SCOTUS and its members? They’ll be the royal court and no longer just supreme. That would make them courtiers rather than justices, but to some of them the new role would come easily. As a member of the royal court, Clarence Thomas, for example, could stop pretending that he likes vacationing in an RV on Walmart parking lots and would no longer have to restrain his inner Marie Antoinette. Naturally, staying away from lamp posts and guillotines would be key to his continued thriving as a luxury loving courtier.
As for the pros and cons of a monarchy, was George III really that bad? According to Thomas Jefferson he was a monster. But Jefferson hated all Englishmen since he owed them a lot of money and the British banks wouldn’t accept his American currency. Yes, it’s hard to love your creditors. That King George abolished the slave trade and had all his children (15!) with the same wife didn’t put him in Jefferson’s good book either. However, calling him a tyrant — as Jefferson did to put more drama in the Declaration of Independence — was a bit over the top since the British Parliament had more control over King George III than Congress would ever have over President George I or any of his successors.
Ok then, let’s think this through. Who do we start the dynasty with? And the answer is easy. Give the job to Prince Harry. He is already in the country, he speaks English, and I am sure we will get used to his plummy accent. If a B-listed actor from Hollywood can win the Cold War, imagine what a spare prince from England could do. Given his family history, he might even be able to kick Russia out of Ukraine. At least that’s what happened when his 4th great grandmother, Queen Victoria, was running her empire. And think about the guaranteed diversity bonus that comes with an office that’s hereditary: Harry’s successor will be Princess Lilibet I — born in the USA and America’s first queen of color.
Henning Schroeder is a professor at the University of Minnesota and currently teaches in the Department of German, Nordic, Slavic & Dutch. His email address is schro601@umn.edu and his Twitter (X) handle is @HenningSchroed1.
An earlier version of this article appeared in MinnPost.
