[Rockingham]

Well informed and nicely put.

Where long established and of beneficial effect, as in some places in Europe and Asia, the continuation of a monarchy may make sense. Burkean conservatism urges that leaving settled things alone is usually the wisest course. And in repairing a shattered nation, a monarch may have some value, as with Juan Carlos in Spain and the elderly Afghan king.

On balance though, monarchy is ill-suited for the modern era, with more useless or pernicious examples than favorable ones. I am especially baffled as to why any American -- even a libertarian -- especially a libertarian -- would genuinely urge a monarchy here.

[annalex]

why any American -- even a libertarian -- especially a libertarian -- would genuinely urge a monarchy here

Because monarchy is libertarian. See my previous post to X.

[jackbob]

I am especially baffled as to why any American -- even a libertarian -- especially a libertarian -- would genuinely urge a monarchy here.

This is because without further refinement and development of established libertarian theory, it automatically evolves into a feudalistic monarchy if put into practice without outside interference. Of course this would never happen, but a theory must be able to maintain a consistent view on which compromises are then made. With out it, compromises are directionless and random, resulting in unintended consequences.