REPUBLIC




Democracy provides people composed of equal citizens without distinctions of ethnic group, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, personal and social conditions.
Every citizen potentially can hold each public office and each public office is elective and revocable. For these reasons democracy is necessarily republican.
In the monarchies (both absolute and liberal constitutional) instead the public office of head of state always belongs to the royal family, it is being entrusted to her breed for reasons of blood. This practise causes a kind of worship of the royal family, and the subjects have to put up with all the adventures of the little princes and of the privileged relationship for dynastical reasons.
A head of state that is democratically elected represents the majority of the people.
The royal family, the king, instead, who does he represent? Who elected him? Nobody.
Moreover there are very valid reasons that prevent us from a sense of identification to the royal family: according to you, do you think citizens feel them more represented from people they have elected and that, like citizens in their job, they can be confirmed or fired for reasons of merit, or with the king and his children, who hold a lifelong public office for dynastical reasons?
It's natural that a citizen feels him more represented from an elected politician, even if he supports opinions very different from his own, instead of a king, that such he is only because is child of the king.
It is obvious because the king and the royal family represent a way of life extremely different from citizens one. Citizens have to earn all with their own abilities the public offices, the work, eveything in life. Instead the royal family has everything as given for reasons of blood.
Even in the liberal and democratical constitutional monarchies, in which the public office of head of state provides for few powers, it still remains a privilege that's in conflict with the democratical principle of every public office is elective and revocable, established from citizens according their own opinions on the abilities and merits of the candidates.
The dynastical succession of the political power clashes with democracy, the which provides for all the citizens have equal rights and duties, while in the monarchy the royal family enjoys privileges of blood.
Can the royal family in a monarchy represent national history? No they can't, people make history, and their government, not that handful of people which is the royal family; perhaps they make gossip.
The democratical republic is an achievement of civilization, the liberal consitutional monarchy is a remnant of the dictatorship of the past history.