Why be a Jacobite?

    Be warned that to be a Jacobite is a lonely existence, there are no jubilees or the commemorative merchandise that characterizes monarchies in the 21st century. There is but only a wistfulness to what might have been and a tiny hope that the true cause might be fulfilled. A good question to start with would be "What does a Jacobite believe in?", to put it simply we are monarchists generally from the anglosphere and paradoxically at least a plurality seem to be American although no in depth study has ever been concluded. What separates us is that we hold that in 1688 in the so called "Glorious Revolution" James II the king of England, was illegally overthrown by the Parliament and usurped by his daughter and son in law, also illegally. And because Parliament has no right to dethrone a reigning monarch, James II and his heirs are the true sovereigns of England, Scotland and Ireland. This also means by extension that the line of rulers since this usurpation is illegitimate. Now this sounds all very technical, very historic, and not at all bearing on the world nowadays. So I make a case based on my personal experience as a monarchist and as a right winger. 

                                                              His Majesty James II (r.1685-1701)

    Over time I had warmed to the idea of monarchy coming from a country (USA) that hasn't had a king in over two centuries. The ideals of romanticism, hierarchy, and honor exemplified by the concept of monarchy had found a welcome audience in me. But what put me off was my distaste in the most visible representatives of said concept; the Windsor family. A family of divorcees, a known pedophile, a feminist and a man so whipped in the form of Harry only his skin color prevents him from accurately portraying Kunta Kinte. Their main purpose it seems is only to fuel the sales of tabloids with their collective stupidity. Because honestly what do they actually even do? Ribbon cutting? Christmas Speeches? They are mascots, and not even particularly good ones at that, if Britain secretly decided to replace the Windsors with a nice family of penguins I doubt most people would notice and the functions of the government would not change except when a major piece of legislation is passed we get a photo shoot of the Prime Minister and the King Penguin dipping his flipper in ink and then happily imprinting it onto the piece of legislation to the joyful applause of the photographers present. I was particularly disgusted by the recent congratulations sent in response to the proclamation of a republic in Barbados, with Charles sent in as a representative to his own mother's ousting. Remember when at the very least monarchs got angry at being deposed, it is an insult to every past monarch who have fought wars for their rightful thrones, I mean if the monarchs themselves don't seem to believe in monarchy why should we? 

   I had attempted to give them the benefit of the doubt, poor Elizabeth hadn't asked for this situation I told myself, the power of the monarchy had all but evaporated by the time she took her coronation oath. But that simply was not true, compared to the other "Constitutional Monarchies" in the Nordic countries and the Benelux she had significant power to refuse assent to legislation. Indeed the recent scandal involving this use of a "shadow veto" to torpedo legislation has been uncovered through recent journalistic inquiry of Parliament, including the Military Actions Against Iraq Bill which would have transferred the power to conduct military operations in Iraq from the Monarch to the Prime Minister. So this "Queen" can be roused from inaction to protect her personal power but did she ever intervene when an Act of Parliament specifically contradicted her Oath of Coronation. As a Christian, I am particularly offended by her cowardice, she has given assent to the liberalization of abortion, to same-sex marriage and so on which are blatantly anti-Christian laws and go against the precepts of the Church of England of which she is supposed to be the Supreme Governor and the "Defender of the Faith". But you who is reading might retort that the moment she did something against the will of Parliament that she would be thrown out, and to that I say what sort of "Monarchy" is that, secondly I would say you implicitly admit then that she is the parasitic coward she appears to be, unwilling to take any sort of stand as long as she has her castles and her servants. 

     So what now I thought? Did this mean I would have to accept this horrid situation of a so called monarchy that's nothing more than a rubber stamp? It was in this limbo where I fell into reading about the cause of the Jacobites who fought several unsuccessful wars to reclaim their rightful kingdoms. Who represented the last hope of a true monarchy in the British Isles and who were the mortal enemies of those who would prostitute the kingdoms to every evil cause that exists. I decided then I would rather support this seemingly lost cause with it's respect to traditional law and where sovereignty rests with the king and ultimately God rather than support a moribund puppet show that blackens the name monarchy wherever it appears. 

                                      The Hero of the 1745 Uprising "Bonnie Prince Charlie" (r. 1766-1788)

    I would say most of all that Jacobitism is more than a simple political belief, it is a mythos unto itself with incredible staying power in that in over three hundred years it has transcended from being the political agent of the will of the Stuart dynasty to becoming a deep desire, a longing for a once and future kingdom where order can be restored and righteousness can be brought back to the land.