Belgium, Britain and Monarchy

It is not good, I know, to compare one country with another, but sometimes I cannot resist it. Especially this is so for the countries of the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Belgium. The two are very different and also have very much in common. It is also my confession that I think of this more probably because I hear now so much criticism from British politicians directed toward the existence of Belgium as a “proper country”, which they say it is not. And yet, look at the similarities of these two countries. Both are constitutional monarchies, both even have the same family of royalty. Both are also diverse countries, not like all countries in Europe are diverse now, but the mixture of Flemish and Walloon in Belgium and the mixture of Celtic and Anglo-Saxon and Norman in Great Britain. Both have also been close allies since the British intervened in the First World War in reaction to the invasion of Belgium and for that the Belgians have never missed being grateful and honoring that sacrifice on our behalf. And yet, some British politicians still denigrate my country and publicly cheer for Belgium to be broken up and destroyed.

What inspired me to think of a new comparison was that some of these political figures, in their own country and policies relating to that, are quite correct. Time to name a name: Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party. I cannot be anything but opposed to this man because he constantly insults my country, my people and wishes for us to be broken up and destroyed. He is also very much against the European Union, which does not bother me so much as his being very much against the Kingdom of Belgium. Yet, I have at least one friend (who is pro-Belgian of course) who greatly likes Nigel Farage and has pointed out to me that Farage is a proud British monarchist who wants the UK and the Commonwealth countries to preserve their monarchy. That is good for them and I have no problem with that, I support that also, and if he would only keep his words about his own country and not mine I would maybe be able to like Farage also. But, he does not and so I cannot like him and must be opposed to him. But this made me think to compare the attitudes toward the British and the Belgian monarchies in each country.

My perspective may not be correct but anyone can leave a comment to tell me so. I never used to watch much news coverage from Britain. I did not watch much news at all when I was very small (I was watching cartoons!) but now I am in education exile I see occasionally the BBC while still trying to stay up to date with news from home. One thing I have noticed is that the British news does not seem to mention their Queen very much at all. Unless there is some major social event she is connected with, they do not, as I have seen, pay much attention at all to the Queen or the others royals of the family. This surprised me because, since the British monarchy is so grand and famous around the world, because of their past empire (and everyone must agree it is the most grand) I thought the BBC would have always some news about the Queen. But I have seen very little and that what I did see was always in reference to some occasion social. Not like Belgium at all. From my perspective, the news in Belgium mentions the King quite regularly and in terms political and governmental not social only. Even though in Belgium we are being a popular monarchy and have no grand ceremonies with the King wearing ermine robes and wearing a crown and surrounded by servants in antique costumes, it seems the monarchie in Belgium is more central while the monarchy in Britain the serious media (not the gossip mags) just more often ignore their Queen and royals.

Is my perception incorrect? I know British friends read this (they are my number three source of readers after the USA and Belgium) so they can tell me if my view is incomplete. Thinking about this, I thought it was logical because the monarchy is for Britain now very separated from politics and all political problems and solutions. In Belgium this might also be the case except that the divisions in the political parties* means that the King must have a more central role as keeping peace between the two sides and forcing him to be the “adult in the room” (and the politicians do often behave like children it looks like). This does not happen in the United Kingdom. I heard nothing about the Queen being involved when, after last elections, a power-sharing government had to be negotiated between the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrat Party. I know in Britain there is also now regional governments in North Ireland, Scotland and maybe Wales (I am uncertain of that one, I thought they had an assembly their own but also I thought they were always a part of England so, I am not certain of that situation). Maybe this worked better for United Kingdom than Belgium, I do not know, since I never hear of the Queen must settle disputes between English, Irish and Scottish people. However, in Belgium, the monarchy may not be so grand but is very important because the King is the one person with no regional agenda.

The King of the Belgians must work very hard, especially when there is disagreement and discord (as we have seen very clearly in this extended time with no government) and although British and Belgians both have people that like to mock and make comedy ridicule of their monarchs, in Belgium, even those who are not supportive of the monarchy must accept that it is important and they cannot ignore it because it is the central, unifying institution of the country. The former Prime Minister was ridiculed by some for saying all that kept Belgium together was football, beer and the King. If that is so, the King is even more important than anyone thought because beer and football cannot take any action to bring about political compromise and encourage national unity. The King may not be every day in the news, but he cannot also be ignored and it cannot be denied his crucial part in the political process of the country.

*Another problem I have is Farage saying there are no national parties in Belgium. This is not true! Votez B.U.B.!

Publication on the Monarchie

There is a new publication (in English) available here on the Belgian monarchie. I thought it a very helpful and informative booklet, suitable for printing. It is pdf format and covers the history of the monarchie, the accomplishments of the past kings as well as the duties of the King in the government, the role of the monarchie today and the modern Royal Family. Also it includes some nice pictures from history and current times.

Also I heard today that Princess Melanie de Ligne is going to be married to Paul Weingarten (no date known yet). Princess Melanie is the daughter of Prince and Princess Wautier de Ligne, the granddaughter of Prince Antoine de Ligne and Princess Alix of Luxembourg who is sister to Grand Duke Jean of Luxembourg. Her uncle, Prince Michel, is head of the Ligne house, successor of the famous Belgian Prince Eugene de Ligne who might have been our king.

Why Some "Monarchists" Hate Belgium?

Until making the acquaintance of a certain “mad man” I had no real contact with the community “monarchists”. Like most people I did not think too much about it, I always support my country, my monarchie and that is all. Since I have had more contact I have found being a Belgian royaliste can put you in a minority even for the monarchists. I found out myself that just because some one says they are a monarchist does not mean they support the Kingdom of Belgium. In fact, I heard many of the same arguments one hears often of the regionalist republican factions that Belgium is not “really” a country, it is an “invented state” or there is just “no reason” for Belgium to even exist. So, these “monarchists” would tell King Albert II and the Saxe-Coburgs (the last having a throne after the Queen in England) to pack their bags and go because there is no “reason” for there to be a Belgium anyway. This made me exceptionally angry I confess because I did not expect these same attacks on my country and my king from people who identify as supporters of monarchie in the world. I get angry enough of anyone attacking in words my king and my people, no matter the language they speak (I come from both).

Moderates voices seem to support Belgium, but not with very much enthusiasm. Rather they defend their own and not care too much if that of another is under attack. I admit my friend the Mad Monarchist is an exception to this since I have known him to strongly defend the monarchie of any country that was under attack as if it were the most important in the world, no matter where it is from. I know him and know he has very definite opinions and preferences but these are put aside for his position of being what he calls “pan-monarchist”. Not many are like that though. In my experience, I was surprised at who attacked the Belgian kingdom and who, if they would not defend it really, would not be attacking it. I was surprised to see monarchists British not joining in attacking Belgium. I should not really be but I have been so used to attacks and insults on Belgium coming from Great Britain but this should not be. Both countries have had the same royal family basically from the time of Prince Albert in Great Britain and King Leopold I in Belgium. Both countries have always been allies (even if not always trusting) and should continue I think.

I was surprised to see the most active attacks and insults coming from the direction of France (just to remind, I do not say this to cover everyone, only the experience of myself in dealing with monarchists slandering Belgium). One, perhaps, was more understandable, coming from a supporter of the House Bonaparte. I guess they would oppose any kingdom they think the French Empire should control. But for simply a French royaliste I do not understand the opposition to Belgium. The French kingdom was crucial in securing the independence of the modern Kingdom of Belgium, King Louis Philippe intervened to convince the Dutch not to make a fight against the independence movement. Also, we know, the first Queen of the Belgians was French! Louise d’Orléans, consort of King Leopold I, was daughter of the French king and a princesse of the Bourbon-Two Sicilies family branch. I could possibly understand the French Republic opposing to Belgium just because they might hate kings regardless, but it makes no sense for monarchist French to oppose Belgium when royal France supported the creation of modern Belgium, the first Queen was French and so the second King of the Belgians was half-French. I also could point out for those supporting Bonaparte that the Belgian and Bonaparte families are related now also.

The issue of Belgium being an “artificial” country also is one I have answered so many times it is exhausting. Belgium is not “artificial” or “invented” or anything like that. I have (tried) shown here many times that Belgian history is ancient, going back to Roman times. The regions of today have been unique but united since the days many centuries ago of Burgundy, Hapsburg Spain and Austria when the first union was formed. Belgium existed long before 1830, before the Dutch were given the area it was the Austrian Netherlands but many people even then still called the area Belgium and for a very long time called the people of that region Belgians even when there was no independent country named “Belgium”. Vlaanderen, Wallonie have been together for hundreds of years and it was not “artificial” pulling things out of the air in 1830 to put them together in their own independent kingdom. There had even already been a short period of independence before that, I have blogged about this, that was the United States of Belgium in 1788-90.

Some of the objection (I am told more than experiencing) is on religious grounds by ultra-conservative Catholics. This, I do not comprehend also and as I have said I am Catholic of course, not very religious, but I know the Catholic Church has always been important in Belgium. The area has always been Catholic, that was even another source of unity. The Protestants became the Netherlands but the Hapsburg-retained south, Dutch and French speaking, remained Catholic. The first King was not but his wife and children were and the Catholic clergy were very supportive of the independence of the Kingdom of Belgium. I understand they were reluctant toward this but the actions of the House Orange in supporting Protestants they finally decided the revolution was justified. It is true that Belgium is not an officially religious state but the monarchie especially has been more Catholic than most. The country then is not officially Catholic but the monarchie is (most people traditionally too but I address here the monarchie).

King Leopold I supported his daughter and Maximilian von Hapsburg in cooperation with the Catholic party in establishing the Mexican throne. King Leopold II supported Catholic missionaries to the Congo and the Belgian volunteers who went to Rome to fight for the Pope against the Italian unification powers. King Albert I was very religious and was the only Allied leader to answer the plea of the Pope for just and peaceful end to the Great War. King Leopold III also was a deeply religious man, keeping Catholic principles in mind in all of his conduct. We know how King Baudouin was very religious and risked political crisis to refuse a law the Catholic Church said was immoral. We know also King Albert II had protested against such laws the Church objected too also. Where else, I would like to know, is a monarchy still existing that has been so strongly Catholic as this even with no official state religion and total religious freedom (who thought some would even be around now who think that is a negative)? So, I have seen all of these objections, considered them and none of them make any sense to me at all. Anti-Belgian bigotry is common (and since blogging I have found in history this is not new) and since their arguments make no sense I can only assume this is the real reason for them. To all of those, I say, please, get past that. I have no prejudice against countries (even Germany that I am wary of considering) so please do not be prejudiced against mine.

Monarchie - Why?

I have answered this many times, but never here as I remember. I am often asked (by Americans) why I am a royaliste. If I have not much time, I say, "Why are you a republican". Naturally then they become very upset and tell me they are a Democrat! That must be an American "thing" of some kind. My point there though is the easy answer is the same as why Americans support the President. Their country is a republic, they love their country and they are then republicans. In the same way, my country is a kingdom, I love my country and so I support totally my king and Family Royal. There is, naturally, more to it than that because I think monarchie is usually better in other countries also, not Belgium only. When I have time, and am asked, I explain this. I think it is better to have a monarchie, maybe not for everyone (don't be frightened Americans) but for most of the time.

Sometimes I am asked why I think it is better to be a kingdom. I ask them why they think is better to be a republic. They usually answer because they have democracy, freedom and civil rights. I tell them naturally that Belgium (and the others in Europe) also have democracy, freedom and civil rights as well. Many people stick in the past thinking that to have freedom you must murder a king, but surely we can see today that is not true. In modern times, monarchies keep people free rather than oppressing them. When Germany banished the Kaiser this allowed Adolf Hitler to become a dictator. If the Kaiser had been around he could have easily dismissed Hitler from office (like the King of Italy did to Mussolini). Joseph Stalin could not have come to power if the Russian Emperor was still alive. Russia certainly did not become more free after killing their emperor. Spain would not be democratic at all today without their King. All the freedom they have is owed to the King. Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg are the most free, liberal countries anywhere and all with monarchies.

Especially today when the nation-state seems to be going away, because not everyone is "Swedish" in Sweden or "Danish" in Denmark any more. Every country in western Europe today includes people with various different national origins, religions, cultures and histories from where they come from. The monarchie is something that provides something to unite people. Always in Belgium this has been important and I think we understand better than most just how important this aspect of a monarchie is. Saying that as I do then I am sometimes told that it must not be working because Belgium is not much united anymore right? That is true, in part, but that is not the fault of the King. The King is someone who can unite people if they want to be united. He cannot make people love each other, but through history the King has always been the one to unite and stay focused on the national issues and not regional ones. I think the King could still be a greater force for unity, possibly, but he is hindered by the self-interested politicians, the no-compromise regions, also I think is somewhat important: the lack of respect show for the King in society. When so many can make jokes of the King he is not going to be able to bring people together as easily if people do not treat him with respect.

Of course, I love my country best, any my monarchie best. I think the monarchie has been the most central thing in making Belgium to survive despite divisions over the history. Also I think Belgium has been very fortunate to have very good kings (and queens) over the history. It helps to be founded with a good, balanced government type so the King can always help but never harm. I like all of our kings, I think we have had a good history compared to others of good kings who have really been devoted to their countries and service to their people. Sometimes a mistake is made, but all the kings have done valuable service and I think the King today is doing probably more every day than any other monarch in service to his country because of the situation he has to deal with. I like monarchie, I think it is usually better and I think we have, for us, the best!

"Métier de Roi de A à Z"

Former advisor to kings Baudouin and Albert II, Pierre-Yves Monette has written a "bible of the monarchie" to explain, from A to Z the words and phrases related to the institution. What is the difference between an orderly and an aide? What do they do? He relates how foreign trips and visits are handled, what goes on in the different departments of the palace, their responsibilities and how functions the different institutions related to the monarchie and the constitutional position of the crown in this new book.

Ancien conseiller des rois Baudouin et Albert II, Pierre-Yves Monette a rédigé une "bible de la monarchie", dans laquelle sous forme d'abécédaire, il explique tous les mots et expressions liés à l'institution.

The Thoroughly Evil Men

Julien Lahaut

Jean-Pierre Van Rossem

These men did their best to ruin solemn national occasions for the whole country because of their own selfish views. One got what he deserved, the other at least went to prison for a time (though not because of doing this of course but for a crime of fraud -cheating people of their money, very rich for two Marxists).

Didier Reynders Addresses the Monarchie

Didier Reyners discusses the possibilities of division and the place of the monarchy at La Libre, directed from the Blog of the Royal Belgian. There is some talk now that if there is division the name of Belgium will be kept and the monarchie also will still be maintained. That is good, I think, but then I wonder why go ahead with such a division anyway? If that is so it does not sound like things will be very much different from today where almost everything is already divided. I hope this means that some of the hardliners are being moved by the display of patriotism unity of the people and no longer think that the division of the country will be so easy and so are trying to make it such a way for it to be an idea more palatable for the Belgian people who do not want to throw away the whole history of our country. All also displays I think the central role of the King and how important is the monarchie to Belgium. Am I very wrong to say the division may have already happened some past time ago if the King was not here?

Trust Growing of Prince Philippe

S.A. Prince Philippe, Duc d'Brabant is considered more trustworthy by most of the country now. This does not completely match his popularity, and that is unfortunate, but a study taken by Flemish tv shows that more people than not now consider that Prince Philippe is qualified and prepared better than anyone else to be the next monarch with 53% saying he is "ready" for the job. What I did not like about this poll was that it presented the poll like a contest between the family since it also said that 21% favored Princesse Astrid and 4% favored Prince Laurent. They will not be monarch so why even ask opinions about them? This should not be about having favorites among the family royal or have them compete for popularity between themselves.

Anyway, I never understood why some people have had a problem with Prince Philippe. He has always seemed to me like a regular, normal guy who is correct and dignified, seems a good family man and I think he will be a good king who will have concern for his country and his people. From where comes the opposition to him over the years? But, I am glad to agree with the majority on this. I also agree with what the poll said about Princesse Mathilde that she was a big help to the popularity and public image of her husband. I love Princesse Mathilde and I would agree she could only make Prince Philippe better to have her with him. However, I have to again complain about the poll too for also pointing out that she is more popular than Queen Paola who is also they find not as popular as Queen Fabiola (again with the competition!) which I think is unfair and just a rude and unkind way of asking the questions. Queen Paola has been victim to alot of gossip lately and it makes me angry. I like all three of the great royal ladies and I do not have to like any less to like the others more.

I was also unhappy that results said 67% said the next king should have less responsibility for the government. Less? How much less can he have already? I think he should have more to deal with the corrupt politicians I was just talking about in the previous posting. The King is the only one in the government I really trust to at least have the best intentions and committment to keep the country together and try his best to want what is best for everyone. I think Prince Philippe will make a good king and I think he should have more responsibility and a bigger part in government that is now the situation.