A New Jersey Reader Says Britain`s Downfall Not Queen Elizabeth`s Fault

NOTE: PLEASE say if you DON`T want your name and/or
email address published when sending VDARE email.

05/03/11 – A Reader In Italy Thanks Us For Reporting What The Italian Mainstream Media Is Ignoring

Re: Sean Gabb`s article

Monarchy, Nation-States, And The Failed Reign of
“Elizabeth The Useless”

From: Steve Nagy [

Mr. Gabb
shouldn`t be too hard on Queen Elizabeth. It is exactly
because the UK doesn`t have a written constitution
outlining each branch of government`s responsibilities
and powers that HM is in such a difficult position.

If there were a
written constitution that specifically allowed the
monarch to veto legislation and outlined the process as
to how Parliament could override such a veto, Gabb`s
criticism would be well founded—because then she truly
would be part of the problem. But if, in a

post-war, post-empire
environment (especially

the 1960s
) she were to exercise royal prerogative
that prerogative would be quickly legislated away.

As an example,
recently the

Grand Duke of Luxembourg
vetoed legalizing
euthanasia and assisted suicide. [Luxembourg
strips monarch of legislative role
December 12, 2008] Luxembourg`s parliament took
away that right by amending their constitution.

I am a person
who firmly believes in a
"balance of
, something Britain does not have in any way,
shape or form. The House of Commons

rules the roost.
House of Lords is a joke. At least the

Queen has ceremonial value.

 I am also a
person who believes that not every branch of government
needs to be elected directly by the people.


US Supreme Court
and the

original selection method of US Senators
are good
examples of offices not directly elected by the people.

But I also
believe that a hereditary branch of government can
provide a valuable counterbalance to the politicians.

"democracy" and "universal

are the

West`s new religion,
regardless of the results. Why,
the US tries to
on countries that don`t want it and may
not even be suited for it.

Unless a country
has a written constitution, instead a constitution that
can be changed on a whim, today`s monarch is in a no-win