Le monarchia danese (Adaptate de un texto per Lars Rosenmeier)

(Languages of this post: Interlingua, English)

Le rege danese Frederik le Septime (1808-1863) esseva un homine tranquille e demotic, alora al 21 de martio 1848, quando un demonstration con 15.000 homines, guidate per le politico Orla Lehman, presentava al rege un un demanda pro le democratia, ille lo simplemente acceptava, e le democratia danese esseva effundite sin un fluxo de sanguine, e al 5 de junio le proxime anno Danmark habeva su prime constitution democratic, le “Grundlov”.

Iste esseva un decision sage per rege Frederik, qui non solmente evitava esser decapitate, como es le costume durante revolutiones, ma anque reteneva un poc de potentia (Danmark deveniva completemente democratic solmente in 1901.)

Alora il es gratias al sagessa de Frederik, que Danmark ancora es un monarchia post 160 annos. In nostre era illuminate, stante al summitate de saper e scientia, IT, e technologia genetic, nos ancora ha un familia regal, qui porta coronas, vive in castellos, e transversa nostre urbes in carrossas auree a occasiones festive. E illo es plus popular que jammais antea.

Nostre regina currente, Margrethe, nos ha guidate desde 1972. Su familia consiste de su sposo, le prince consorte Henrik (anteriormente conte Henri de Monpezat de Francia) e lor infants, prince hereditar Frederik e prince Joachim.

Le familia regal es amate per le majoritate del populo, particularmente le regina e le prince hereditar. Le prince consorte, al altere latere, pare esser un poco minus popular, forsan inter altere cosas proque ille post quaranta annos in Danmark non pote parlar danese completemente ben, e proque ille ha declarate que ille soleva castigar su filios “como cavallos e canes”. Ma assi es ya le circumstantias. Le familia regal sta super le lege, e on non pote expectar que illes omitte batter su infantes, como es requirite per le lege le resta del population.

Ultra esser un fumator ardente, nostre regina non es le figura jovial e demotic, como esseva pro exemplo su patre Frederik le None, le rege marinero qui esseva cognoscite pro su multe tatus. Nostre regina e su familia, al altere latere, pare ambir se exclusivemente con personas aristocratic o multo ric, e solmente incontra le populaceo durante le visitas official in varie urbes, que illa debe facer alcun vices cata anno.

Similemente, quando le regina recipe visitantes pro le “Nytårskur” (le celebrationes del nove anno), il es clar que solmente personas ric o distinguite pote esser invitate, justo como solmente tal personas pote esser considerate pro esser innobilite. Le regina ha explicate in intervistas, que isto non es antidemocratic, nam tote personas in nostre societate ha “possibilitates equal” de devenir ric o distinguite.

Ben que pro multes il non es multo cortese, on poterea ya demandar se, perque nos ancora hodie debe haber iste institution antiquate que es le monarchia, e si nos es adequatemente reimbursate pro le multe milliones de coronas que nos cata anno paga al sustenentia luxuose de iste poc personas.

Un argumento que on sempre audi in responsa a iste question, es que le monarchia ha un influentia positive al economia danese. Il es ver, naturalmente, que membros del familia regal sovente participa in ferias mercantil e altere eventos ubi illes pote beneficiar le affaires de grande interprisas. Ma in iste dies ubi placias de labor de plus in plus es movite (“outsourced”) al extero, on pote ya demandar se si iste activitates vermente beneficia le populo integre, o solmente le actioneros del interprisas.

Le monarchia anque produce beneficios pro certe partes del pressa, que sempre ha bon historias a imprimer re le familia regal. Pro exemplo il ha le cartel de pressa gigante “Aller Press A/S”, que inter multe altere magazines possede “Billed-Bladet”, que consiste quasi solmente de historias elogiose del familia, e “Se & Hør”, que ha como su specialitate imprimer historias irreverente de illo.

Finalmente nos naturalmente non debe oblidar le multissime personas qui se gaude per admirar le familia regal. Como actores e cantatores, illes da un poco de brillantia e fabula al vita enoiose de multes.

Si on non pertine a un del tres gruppos mentionate supra tamen, il pote esser difficile comprender le utilitate del monarchia.

In mi opinion le solution es simple. Illes que le monarchia beneficia pote anque mesme pagar pro illo. In Danmark, tote membros del ecclesia popular (statal) debe pagar taxas ecclesiastic. Ma si on se retira del ecclesia on es exemptate del taxas.

Proque non facer le mesme con le monarchia? Totes qui ha (o crede haber) ulle beneficio del monarchia, pote esser “membros del monarchia” e pagar “taxas monarchista”. E illes qui non vide le utilitate del monarchia, o qui forsan mesmo lo considera un institution antiquate e ridicule, poterea retirar se de illo. Le monarchia certo superviverea un tal arrangiamento, viste que illo es tanto popular.

Un tal systema es naturalmente politicamente inimaginabile hodie. Ma in le proxime 50 annos le composition ethnic de Danmark se cambiara sin dubita profundemente. Il sera interessante vider que occurrera con le monarchia in iste periodo transitori.

---

The Danish king Frederik VII (1808-1863) was a a calm man of the people, so on March 21, 1848, when a demonstration of 15,000 men, led by the politician Orla Lehrman, presented the king with a demand for democracy, he simply accepted it, and Danish democracy was born without bloodshed, and on June 5, Denmark had its first democratic constitution, the “Grundlov.”

This was a wise decision by King Frederik, who not only avoided being decapitated/beheaded, as often happens during revolutions, but also managed to keep a small amount of power (Denmark became completely democratic only in 1901.)

Thus it is thanks to the wisdom of Frederik that Denmark now is a monarchy in the past 160 years. In our enlightened era, as we stand at the summit of science and knowledge, computer science, and genetic technology, we still have a royal family that wears crowns, lives in castles, and travels through our cities in golden coaches on festive occasions. And it is now more popular than it ever has been.

Our current queen, Margrethe, has reigned over us since 1972. Her family consists of her hustand, Prince Consort Henrik (formerly the Count Henri de Monpezat of France) and their children, the hederitary Prince Frederik and Prince Joachim.

The royal family is loved by the majority of the people, particularly the queen and the hereditary prince. The Prince Consort, on the other hand, seems a little less popular, perhaps, among other things, because after forty years in Denmark he is not able to speak Danish all that well and because he has said that he used to punish his children “like horses and dogs>’ But that’s the way it goes. The royal family is above the law, and they cannot be expected to avoid beating their children, as the rest of the population is compelled to do by law.

Besides being an ardent smoker, our queen is not a jovial woman of the people, as was, for example, her father Frederik IX, the sailor king who was known for his many tattoos. Our queen and her family, on the other hand, seem to go around exclusively with aristocratic or very rich people, and they only run into the general population during official visits to various cities, which they must make a few times each year.

Similarly, when the queen receives visits for “Nytårskur,” (the new year’s celebration), it is clear that only rich or famous people can be invited, just as these people alone can be considered for noble titles. The queen has explained in interviews that this is not antidemocratic, for everyone in our society has “equal possibilities” for becoming rich or famous.

Though it may not be very polite for many people, it is still possible to ask whether we should still put up with the antique institution that is the monarchy and if we are adequately compensated for the many millions of crowns that we must pay each year for the luxurious support of this small number of people.

One argument that is always heard in answer to this question is that the monarchy has a positive influence on the Danish economy. It is true, of course, that members of the royal family often participate in business fairs and other events where they can be of benefit to the affairs of large companies. But these days, when jobs are more and more often outsourced abroad, it is possible to ask if these activities really benefit the entire population or only the stockholders of these large companies.

The monarchy also produces benefits for certain parts of the press, which always has good stories to print about the royal family. For example there is the gigantic press cartel “Aller Press A/S,” which among many other magazines owns “Billed-Bladet,” which consists almost completely of stories praising the family, and “Se & Hør,” which has as its specialty the publication of irreverent stories about the royals.

Finally, we must naturally not forget the very large number of people who enjoy admiring the royal family. Like singers and actors, they provide a little fantasy and brilliance to the humdrum lives of many people.

If a person does not belong to one of the three groups mentioned above, however, it can be difficult to understand the usefulness of the monarchy.

In my opinion, the solution is simple. Those benefited by the monarchy can also pay for it themselves. In Denmark, all members of the state church must pay taxes to support it. But people who leave the church are exempt from paying these taxes.

Why not do the same thing with the monarchy? Those who derive (or think they derive) some benefit from the monarchy can be “members of the monarchy” and pay “monarchic taxes.” And those who do not see the usefulness of the monarchy, or who perhaps consider it an old-fashioned and ridiculous institution, can withdraw from it. The monarchy could certainly survive with such an arrangement since it is so popular.

Such a system is naturally politically inconceivable today. But in the next fifty years the ethnic composition of Denmark will no doubt change profoundly. It will be interesting to see what will happen to the monarchy in this period of transition.