The paradoxical power of the monarchy's powerlessness
English original of article published in Italian today by La Stampa. The state funeral is not "the end of an era", and the Queen cannot have been "a moderating influence"
It is a safe bet that the second event this week at which President Joe Biden, President Emanuel Macron and Prime Minister Liz Truss are seen together will receive a great deal less attention around the world than the first. But the United Nations General Assembly, the high-level part of which gets under way, today, September 20th, has never exuded the sort of glamour that the British monarchy now commands. Queen Elizabeth II’s final gift to her nation, expressed through her magnificent state funeral, was to demonstrate the strange allure of her very powerlessness.
The funeral, and all that led up to it including the extraordinary 24-hour queues to witness her coffin lying in state, was a demonstration of the great British skill of staging impressive, rather theatrical public performances.
On the day, everything was immaculate, from the extravagant ceremonial uniforms to the perfect drill of the military, to the staging of a funeral service in Westminster Abbey in which the Japanese emperor, the US president and all the others were made to look insignificant, to the medals jangling on the chests of King Charles III and his sons, whether or not they had ever seen active military service.
If you think about it too closely, the whole show can look absurd, beyond the poignant funeral service itself. An institution which has lost all its political or practical power to the demands of a democracy nevertheless surrounded its longest-serving monarch with the sort of trappings that in the past were meant to signify wealth and violent dominance: a golden orb and sceptre, a jewel-laden crown, a military gun carriage, an array of generals and admirals as well as ordinary soldiers, a two-hour service and procession which brought the capital city to a halt.
Today, all those trappings of power are actually symbols of the opposite, of powerlessness. Everything about the monarchy is symbolic rather than real, except the human charm, foibles or frailties of the members of the Royal Family themselves. Even the apparent wealth of the monarchy is actually state wealth: the British monarchy is largely financed by income from land and property assets the true owner of which is the state.
Yet from the point of view of the state and the crown, the absurdity is actually the point. This triumphant final day of Queen Elizabeth’s regal duties showed why the common cliché that her death “marks the end of an era” gets everything upside down. By making the monarchy more glamorous even as it has become less powerful, the Queen and the political classes that have colluded with the crown have sought to make sure that the era never ends. The state funeral was one long statement saying that it won’t.
It is a collusion because the political classes themselves benefit from the powerlessness of the British monarchy, as it ensures that their own actions are less constrained than they would be in countries with written constitutions and, like Italy, with a head of state holding useable powers.
In fact, the glamour and symbolism of the modern British monarchy are expressly designed to divert attention away from the sometimes dirty, sometimes disturbing business of actual government. The great Victorian editor of The Economist, Walter Bagehot, recommended in 1867 that this diversionary, “dignified”, aspect of the monarchy should be enhanced and invested in, but in truth this idea has only really reached its full expression today.
The diversion has been rather successful, from the politicians’ standpoint. After the Queen’s death, it was surprising to see many British commentators claim that during her 70 years on the throne she had had a “moderating influence” on her country. Given what has happened in Britain just in recent years, I would hate to see what a lack of moderation might have brought.
Britain has gone through the constitutional and strategic upheaval of Brexit, on the basis of a small, simple majority in a referendum, it has seen Parliament suspended in a move by then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson to prevent Brexit being disrupted that was later shown to be unlawful, and it has seen ethical codes for ministers ignored or rewritten. The Queen’s views on all these things were not only un-disclosed; had she expressed a view or sought to exert an influence, it would have caused a constitutional crisis.
This diversionary power of a glamorous monarchy may even have drawn attention away from the speeches and more discreet diplomacy between world leaders that we hope might happen at the UN in New York this week. Hopefully it won’t do so for long, as the world needs the leadership that President Biden has shown in the war on Ukraine to be deepened and strengthened as we face new crises over the winter and beyond, and it needs other heads of government to support and follow up that leadership.
The Queen, I feel sure, would agree. The funeral is over. Long live liberal democracy.