Against Elections

In an online discussion of the upcoming elections in the US my friend Ryan Burke, currently serving in the US military, mentioned that he does not vote while on active duty. When asked whether not voting while on active duty is “a thing”, he gave the following answer (quoted with permission):

It’s not an actual rule, but it’s not uncommon. It’s out of concern involvement in presidential politics could interfere with objectivity. Patton put it something like “if I vote for the loser, I voted against my Commander in Chief. If I vote for the winner, I’ve been bought.” Marshall wouldn’t even let FDR call him by his first name, lest he get too chummy and feel constrained from offering criticism of his proposals.

Now, Ryan and I have been arguing about political philosophy for years. As classmates at Thomas Aquinas College we carried on a monarchy vs democracy debate in the student magazine Demiurgus. So I couldn’t resist the obvious response:

That is beautiful. What you said about not voting… But it should be universalized: no-one should vote. We should have an hereditary monarchy.

The head of state should someone to whom everyone can look as the personification and guarantee of the unity of the nation, and as I have argued before,

this function… is fulfilled much better if [the head of state] is the descendent of the kings for whom my ancestors shed their blood, than if he’s just some bloke elected by a party to which I don’t even belong.

Today is the Nationalfeiertag in Austria, so we sang the current national anthem, and I was struck by the verse Hast seit frühen Ahnentagen / Hoher Sendung Last getragen (“Since the early days of the ancestors thou hast borne the burden of a high mission”). If only we had a ruler who’s family history were the embodiment of that statement.

4 thoughts on “Against Elections

      • I think the Legitimists would respond that the ruler who is not acknowledged still has the duty of care of the common good. And what seems to me to be the strength of the Legitimist position, is that it is not bound by such usurpations, which might accidentally serve some aspects of the Common Good, but are ultimately founded on subversions of law (and hence subversion of justice and the common good).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.