[QUOTE=Giles]
It’s hard to see how he could be king of Scotland without also being king of England: why does he limit his ambition in this way?
[/QUOTE]
He is, he says, descended from Bonnie Prince Charlie.
Mind you, that would (in some eyes, at least) also make him eligible for the throne of the rest of Britain…
[QUOTE=Boulter’s Canary]
He is, he says, descended from Bonnie Prince Charlie.
Mind you, that would (in some eyes, at least) also make him eligible for the throne of the rest of Britain…
Perhaps he’s a Scots Nationalist.
[/QUOTE]
The more commonly recognized current claimant in the Jacobite succession is Franz, Duke of Bavaria, styled Francis II:
Note that none of them since Henry IX (Henry Benedict Stuart, d. 1807) have publicly claimed the throne.
The current Jacobite line of succession would actually unite the British throne with that of Liechtenstein - the next in line is Franz’s brother Max, followed by Max’s daughter Sophie, married to the ruling Prince of Liechtenstein, then to her children.
[QUOTE=NinjaChick]
On the other hand, a monarchy means a du jure policy of certain people being ‘superior’ by birth, and that is unjust. But I don’t want to drag this out of GQ, so I’ll let it go.
[/QUOTE]
But it may also be why some people want to bring back a monarchy.
[QUOTE=NinjaChick]
Eh? How does being awarded a governmental position by virtue of birth alone not connote a certain degree of superiority by birth?
[/QUOTE]
Governmental? Not in any of the western democracies mentioned in this thread. Well, maybe the role of Juan Carlos in Spain was taking a direct position, but that has worked out well for Spain.
I think the OP should be more clear in that does he ask if a society would like a return of a UK type monarchy, which has no real power, but is just a figurehead on top of a democracy, or a monarchy like, say, Nepal had a few years ago where the King has absolute and total power…