Traditional monarchy (Spanish: Monarquía tradicional, Portuguese: Monarquia tradicional) is a proposed political regime based on the principles of Thomistic Iusnaturalism,[1] Medieval Corporatism, Municipalist Regionalism[2] [3] and Religious Integralism (like Catholic social teaching and Social Kingship of Christ). It has been advocated by various royalists and traditionalist movements such as Carlism, Portuguese Integralism and Spanish Integrism.[4] [5]
Traditional monarchy is the term used to describe a monarchy (considered by it's followers as the true Monarchy from Classical Politics of the Human nature)[6] in which the monarch has real political power and is more than a figurehead, but not in the centralised "absolutist" form that has been developed in the 16th and 17th centuries, nor the diluted decentralization of Feudal monarchies (like HRE). In this way, the monarch's power is limited by natural law, custom (like uncodified constitution) and other traditional institutions (such as aristocracy, clergy, social corporations) that moderates the Royal Power, instead of a Written Constitution based on 18th century Modern philosophy. There has to be a balance between the power of Representative body (like Parliament) and the power of the Monarchy, in which both should check each other through Subsidiarity so that their decisions are more balanced to reach Virtue that lead to Common good.[7] Also, the Monarchy has to be a Guarantor of Local government by protecting Intermediate Bodies (like Municipality, Estates of the realm Courts, Guilds, Churches, Universities, Corporations, Communes, Familiar units) that serves as organic social bodies (between Monarchy and Subjects) that are protectors of "social sovereignty" of the person and the society from the State sovereignty while also serves as Guarantee for Corporatist Class collaboration, Consociationalism between Multinational societies and Territorial integrity.[8] In short, it would be a strong sovereign who is supported and moderated by the nobility that support him, the clergy that guides him, and the intermediate bodies that advises him.
See also: Mixed monarchy and Common good constitutionalism. Traditionalist monarchists rejected the various changes that Western governments had undergone during the XVIII-XX century and asked for a restoration of an alleged "traditional order" which would have peaked during the Middle Ages (like in the Portuguese Restoration, pre-Bourbon Reforms Spanish Monarchy, pre-Absolutist Kingdom of France, pre-Westphalian Peace Holy Roman Empire, pre-Josephinist Habsburg monarchy, pre-Golden Liberty Polish–Lithuanian union, pre-English Revolution Union of the Crowns, pre-Peter I reforms Russian Tsardom), before the various Secularist and Centralist reforms to develop a modern state, which lead to the creation of first Absolute monarchy and then of Modern Constitutionalism and Liberalism.[9] Traditionalists proposed the abolition of the modern limited institutions in favour of a system of foralist organic representation and political gelasianism that would be theoretically better adjusted to the local traditions and beliefs.
However, before XIX century, the traditionalist monarchical positions had not been formalized in organized political movements (before the bourgeois revolutions, the traditionalists were simple political factions dispersed among the royal courts and opposing to inorganic "political innovations", like parti dévot on French Kingdom), so the first attempts to develop organized parties appeared in Spain and Portugal during the context of Carlist Wars and Liberal Wars, in which Carlists and Miguelists launched proclaims (like Manifiest of the Persians) that later defined a series of political doctrines to reject the paradigms of liberal revolutions (as Liberalism was perceived as a political philosophy contrary to a Christian social order), but also trying to reject the monarchical absolutism that caused the perceived social decline of Christendom by having harmed the "Intermediate Bodies" (popular institutions of the plebeians, like Municipalities, Guilds, Corporations, Parliaments, etc that were guarantors of Class collaboration), local Customary Law (guarantors of Regional Autonomies and Subsidiarity) and the social role of the clergy (the autonomy of the church from the state, guarantors of Natural law) in the name of erroneous ideological assumptions of Modern Philosophy (like Anthropocentrism, Nominalist anti-Metaphysical Realism, Immanentism, Rationalism, Empiricism, Secular humanism, Regalism, Enlightened absolutism, etc) to achieve apparently more "efficiency" and "rationality" in governments that instead led to the Ancien régime crisis.[10] So, for them, traditional monarchy would consist of a reivindication of Iberian tradition (not all traditions, only the ones that were continously mantained because expressed Perennial truths and empirical practices for good Politics) against intents of "foreignizing" the peninsula and also a total opposition to artificialist social engineering of the revolutionaries. For Carlists, the traditional fueros and religious institutions would be a way of defending Spain against liberal intents of europeizing it according to Enlightment philosophers (associated with Afrancesados, Anglophiles and Anti-Catholicism),[11] and would foster a closer relationship with Portugal and Latin America.
However, Traditional Catholics don't believe that the Traditional Monarchy model is only compatible with a Catholic society, instead, they believe that it is a universalist model of government, adaptable to all possible traditions and customs of any human society that is governed by Natural Law and Eternal Law (metapolitical realities that can be known without the aid of Christian revelation or Catholic doctrine, due to being perennial truths on the order of reason and not necessarly from the order of faith). Therefore, the Catholic-monarchist groups considered valid to develop a pan-monarchical solidarity between "authentic reactionaries", regardless of their religion, as long as those were Legitimists (ussually Pretenders depossed after a Liberal Revolution), defended a conception of politics compatible with Medieval Scholasticism (which also appealed to pre-Christian Classic philosophy of law, like Neoplatonism and Aristotelianism) and the aplication of Natural Moral and Philosophical Realism on Iusnaturalism. So Spanish Carlists, Portuguese Miguelists, French Legitimists, Habsburg Royalists and other Catholic Integralist movements made alliances with Traditionalist Orthodox monarchical movements (like White movement), and Reactionary Protestant ones (like Neo-Jacobites or French Protestant Royalists like Association Sully) that had similar conclussions with their Political Philosphy, while also showed sympathy toward Muslim Monarchies (like Ottoman Empire, Qajar Iran, etc) and Pagan Monarchies (like Qing China, Indian Principalities, etc) that were being affected by Western imperialism and their attempts to impose them Modernization theories to make political unstability for economic explotation.[12]
Beside, Traditionalist Monarchies reivindicates Non-Christian Philosophers, like Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, etc.[13] Therefore, in reaction to Age of Enlightenment political philosophy, the Traditionalist Monarchists appealed not only to Counter-Enlightenment, but to Pre-Modern Philosophers and Pre-Counterrevolutionary Politicians, like Augustine of Hippo, Isidore of Seville, Reccared I, Thomas Aquinas, Francisco de Vitoria, Robert Bellarmine, Jerónimo Osório, Francisco de Quevedo, Juan de Mariana, Serafim de Freitas, João Salgado de Araújo, João Pinto Ribeiro, Francisco Velasco de Gouveia, Francisco Alexandre Lobo, Francisco Alvarado, José Acúrcio das Neves etc.[14]
Francisco Elías de Tejada considered a Traditional Monarchy on Contemporary era as "what the old free order of our peoples would have been" if "the european deviations had not meddled in".[15]
A traditional monarchy would develop in an active contrast to absolute and constitutional monarchies by rejecting most political changes from Modernization theory, since the Renaissance to Enlightenment (but not against Industrial society or "natural progressions"), and embracing a medieval conception of politics based on Scholasticism and inspired (but not defined) by ultramontanism.[16] One of it's proponent, António Sardinha, defined it (in the context of Iberian tradition) as "catholic, hereditary, organicist, descentralized, representative, based on the historical power of the crown, the political force of municipalities and provinces, and in the expression of the middle bodies of society", the regime would be "based on God and religion, on tradition, on authority, on principles and convictions, and on order".
See also: Organic law and organicism. Those are a series of Organic Political Bodies and Social organizations from Common people (based on Customary law and Natural Social relation) that should be recognised by the Monarchy (not created or developed by the Monarchy) through Vassalage Pact between Monarch and Subjects, and settled by Fundamental laws and Statutory law (like Spanish Fuero) ratifying that Social Sovereign that precedes the State and it's Sovereignty. This "Sociedalism" is explained as the Monarchy is a Political society based in concrete Associations that are pacted before the establishment of State Jurisdiction (justifying also the existence of Multinational states among different nations that choose to be under a same Political Societies, and also Fragmented Nations that chooses to be under differente Political Societies). It's similar to the modern concept of Statutory corporation, but through an Anti-statist practice, as those Social Corporations (like Estates of the realm, Nations, Municipality, Guilds, Academies) don't depend on having Constitutional Status, only to be justified by Natural rights (which are above the King and it's Monarchy). The existence of such a dualism between social and state sovereignty would serve as a safeguard of the concrete freedoms of human societies and the natural person, by crystallizing in it the "autarchies" of social groups, which emerge from the family as the essential nucleus of society, as it serves the individual person to integrate into society as a whole. The role of the Monarchy is to be a perpetual guarantor of those Concrete Freedoms through legitimacy of exercise, as the Monarchs are submitted to respect that social sovereign to being fulfilled the pact of vassalage, if a King don't fulfil the obligations, the Organized Communities are liberated of it's obligations and can appeal to Right of resistance, justified Rebellion or Secession, so being legally impossible to be under an Autocracy unless through Usurpation. The recognition of Intermediate Bodies also can be done by a Classical Republic (like Venetian republic or Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth), but Traditionalist Monarchists considers that those are less efficient due to not having a perpetual Royal dynasty as Head of state to maintain Political Continuity and the Familialist principles (although Traditionalists Monarchists respect the use of Direct democracy in case those are based on particular traditions and customs).[17] An essential criticism of Traditionalists Monarchists against French Revolution is the abolition of those Intermediate Bodies through Le Chapelier Law 1791, in which was attacked the Traditional Freedom of association to impose Economic liberalism.
For Traditionalist Monarchists, the development of Absolutism wasn't organic, but artificial, and so, against the natural progression of social and political development on the human genre. The causes for the appeareance of Absolute monarchy should have it's roots on the Medieval Disputes of Universal powers[18] between the Papacy (representant of Spiritual power or Church's interests) and the Holy Roman Emperor (representant of Temporal power or Secular interests), that provocated proto-absolutist movements from the Secular Power like the Investiture Controversy, Guelphs and Ghibellines or the Western Schism, in which the Monarchs tried to develop a Centralized government against the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction (protector of Subsidiarity and Corporatism between Hierarchical organizations) and appeared the Caesarist desire of the Monarchs to be powerfuls like pre-Christian Roman emperors, in which all loyalties, all power and all social institutions should be transferred to the state in the person of the King. Those absolutists aspirations will be later systematized on the Renaissance through Secular humanism and then on Enlightened absolutism.
Then it would be stablished the absolutist model of monarchy during the Protestant reformation and normalized in Europe by the Westphalian system, in which there would be attackas against the political power of the Social Corporations (that were mostly in good convivence until the European wars of religion between Protestants and Catholics, along the implementation of French system of Alliances based on Raison d' etat instead of Universitas Christiana) in the name of Political stability. And finally it would be a popular political system among Western intellectuals (specially followers of Modern philosophy) during XVI to XVIII century, like Niccolò Machiavelli, Jean Bodin, Hugo Grotius or Thomas Hobbes.[19]
Some examples of pre-modern political mechanisms that moderated the power of the Monarch were:
From a Political catholicist view, another degeneration of the Traditional Monarchy was the practice of Regalist philosophy among Catholic Monarchies like Bourbon France, Bourbon Spain, Pombalist Portugal, Josephinist Austria-Hungary-Croatia-Bohemia, etc in which the Monarchs, influenced by Gallicanist and Jansenist heresies (which also were influenced by Calvinist intellectuality, like the Huguenots), tried to turn the clergy into mere public officials of the state in which the Pope had spiritual leadership but not political leadership on the Christendom (as those Regalist Monarchs believed that the King was the leader of the Church in their States), and so introducing the Absolutist model of Monarchy, of protestant origin, in the Catholic Political Culture. Those regalist practises on Late Catholic Monarchies briefly before the start of Revolutionary wave generated also a cultural confussion as Traditional Monarchy would be often confused with Regalism and then Right-wing politics in Popular culture.[22] [23]
Despite the rejection of Political constitutions, Traditional Monarchy isn't against the concept of Constitution per se, but against the Contractualist vision of the state from liberal theories of Social contract. However, the Traditional Monarchy should have a series of uncodified constitutions whose material constitutional regime is contained in a series of dispersed constituent treaties (like Statutes, Royal decrees, Parlamentary Edicts) and implicit oral agreements recognised by different social groups (like Moral law, Customary law, Vassalage Pacts) which the Monarch should respect to have Legitimacy of exercise with his Subjects, if not, it's valid the Right of resistance from the Common people and the institutions that are bellow in hierarchy.[24] Also Carlism historiography criticises the constitutionalism based in the political experience and practise of the Constitution of Cadiz, which instead of solving the Spanish Crisis of 1808 in fact the Junta Suprema Central and the Cortes of Cádiz made the conditions for a Civil war in the Spanish Empire due to constitutional conflicts between Self-proclaimed Juntas (like the Juntas on Spanish America) that were claiming to represent the Popular sovereignty without having any Legit Prerogative despite to appeal Enlightenment Ideology of Rousseauian Social contract, generating confusion to the Common people that had no idea of liberal ideologies and mistakenly thought that the constitutional juntas were continuing the Hispanic tradition of fundamental laws and corporatist institutions, like Ancien régime Cortes and Open cabildo.
Traditionalist Monarchists rejects Totalitarianism due to being antithetical their principles of Nation state, National syndicalism and Voluntarism from Fascism, along Internationalism, Proletarian dictatorship/Communist state and Dialectical materialism from Marxism, both based in Hegelian Dialectic and Historicism that are rejected by Scholastics and Perennialists. Also the support of Anti-clericalist, Secularist, Progressivist, Authoritarian Syndicalist and Socialist positions from Totalitarian regimes are against Integralism (which have sympathy toward Economical Distributism and Gremialist Corporations as an opposition to both Capitalist Bourgeoisie Plutocracy and Communist Proletarian Collectivist anarchism).[25]
Concerning Fascist corporatism, the Traditionalist Monarchists perceived their model of Class collaboration as imperfect due to it's Statist tendencies whereby corporate mechanisms for social cooperation between classes from Fascist syndicalism would be useless if they emanate from the sovereignty of the state instead of being "intermediate bodies" between the State and Society in which the Corporation have it's own sovereign from Social organizations and the State only have to recognise it and protect it (according to a concrete conception of society), instead of usurping and trying to replace by expanding the State institutionallity (like Mussolini's National Council of Corporations and Carta Livor or Francoist Sindicato Vertical) that aren't from Organic Social relations but an artificial imposition from an Ideologized State with an abstract conception of society that just lead to a Bureaucratization of Society to submit it to a One-party state. For traditionalist monarchists, Monarco-fascists are considered Reactionary modernists.[26]
See also: Carlism, Integrism (Spain) and Royalist (Spanish American independence). This refers to the supporters for the restoration of Spanish Empire form of government (before Nueva Planta decrees and rejecting the Regalist-Centralists aspects of Bourbon Reforms that introduced Absolutism) and the reject of Atlantic Revolutions' political legacy, like Spanish Revolution of 1820 or Spanish American Revolutions, around countries of the Hispanidad.
See also: Traditionalist Communion, Neocatólicos, Mellismo and Spanish Renovation.
Some schoolars theorized that the first traditionalist monarchal movements were the Austracistas that opposed to the abolition of Catalan constitutions and Crown of Aragon institutionallity after the War of the Spanish Succession
On Spanish America, the traditionalists monarchists were mostly the Counter-elightened faction of the Royalists in Spanish–American War of independence, which also were in contact with the Partidas Realistas (Proto-Carlists) from Spain against the Spanish Constitution of 1812 and then the Trienio Liberal regime for abolishing priviligees to Criollos and Indigenous Estates of the realm to force them to be Spanish citizens without Legal pluralism distinctions according to their regional realities (so, opposing liberal attempt to homogenize institutions to menace the Colonial Corporatism and impose Individualism), while also criticising Bourbon absolutism for not respecting the fueros and autonomy guaranteed in Derecho Indiano by attacking polycentric law by increasing power of Peninsular Governors (like Viceroy or Intendants), unlike the Habsburg Spain which were perceived as more respectful to the Consociationalist Pactism between Monarch and Subjects of distinct kingdomes (as Hispanic-Americans considered Reinos de Indias as provinces of Spain instead of Colonies, but not under administration of Spaniards from Metropoli institutionality, but as Sui iuris under American administration with its own Criollo and Indigenous institutionality in the name of the Spanish Monarchy, which have to be a moderator and supervisor power only), alike the Territorial organization of Spain at the time with distincts Kingdoms constituting the crown of Castile instead of a same and unique Spanish Kingdom (like contemporaneous Spain), in which the Spanish King was the protector of Corporatists institutionality to avoid unjistified injerence of Peninsular from the central government, and even to protect Indigenous or Criollos natural rights by respecting the jurisdiction of the other in the Republica de Indios and Republica de españoles, according to Leyes de Indias (which involucrated heterogeneous taxes instead of a same national tax for all peoples, the maintenance of Feudal Communal property in the rural towns instead of imposing urban Private property system, and the Manorial Cacicazgo system of the Indigenous nobility to have legal protection from their Cacique or Cabildo de Indios). Despite all of this, not all Royalists were Traditionalist Monarchists, as there were also Liberal Royalists which defended the reforms from the Cortes de Cadiz, so provocating Royalist internal conflicts against the Traditionalist, like La Profesa Conspiration in Mexico or Olañeta Rebellion in Peru and Bolivia (in both parties were absolutists and also moderate secessionists).[31] On recent times, have been appearing Carlist Circles on Spanish American countries, developed by loyals to the Comunión Tradicionalista/CT ("Sixtino" Carlists), in support of the application of Traditional Monarchy in Latin American Societies, or even the reunification of Hispanic America with Spain in a Mixed monarchy under the rule of Don Sixto de Borbon and his heirs. Those Carlists Circles are: "Circulo Tradicionalista Celedonio de Jarauta" and "Circulo Tradicionalista Vasco de Quiroga - Michoacan" in Mexico,[32] [33] "Circulo Santa Fe - Bogota" and "Circulo Tradicionalsita Gaspar de Rodillas - Medellin" in Colombia,[34] [35] "Circulo Blas de Ostolaza" and "Circulo Carlista Leandro Castilla" in Peru,[36] [37] "Circulo Tradicionalista del Río de la Plata" in Argentina and Uruguay,[38] "Circulo Tradicionalista de Nuestra Señora de la Asunción del Paraguay" in Paraguay,[39] "Circulo Tradicionalista Antonio de Quintanilla" in Chile,[40] "Circulo San Juan Bautista - Alto Peru" in Bolivia,[41] "Circulo Tradicionalista de Venezuela" in Venezuela,[42] "Circulo Tradicionalista del Reino de Guatemala" in Central America (Guatemala to Costa Rica),[43] "Circulo Tradicionalista Nuestra Señora de la Asunción de Panama" in Panama.[44]
The Comunión Tradicionalista Carlista/CTC" (which don't recognise Don Sixto as successor of Infante Carlos, considering vacant the Spanish Throne) also have been spreading the doctrine of Traditional Monarchy trhough intellectual exchanges with local Reactionary and Integralist Catholic movements in the region, like Cristeros on Mexico.[45]
After the complete defeat of Royalists, most of them were exilled or forced to be expelled to Spain (most of them were called the Ayacuchos and were part of the Caciquism), damaging the Counter-Revolutionary movement extremely bad as they were totally disarticulated on Urban Areas by 1826. However, in Rural Zones (like in Coro, La Guajira, Chiloé, La Frontera, Pasto, Patía, Santa Cruz de la Sierra and Huanta) there were still some Royalists Guerrillas against the submission to Liberal reforms and institutions from the Criollo nationalist elites (like Great Colombia Constitution, Peruvian Republicanism, Bolivian Independence from Peru, Republic of Chile expansionism, First Mexican Empire, etc.), until late 1830s,[46] having in their files Plebeyan groups like Indigenous peoples, Black people, Mestizos and poor Whites that developed a "Popular Royalism" like the Vendee peasant rising or Carlist Wars (which has been poorly studied by Western Historiography).[47] [48] [49] [50] The most important ones were:
On Mexico there was a bright renaissence of Traditionalist Monarchists during the period between First Mexican Empire and Second Mexican Empire, specially from renegades of Conservative Party (seeing them as too Moderates, Caudillists, Centralists and servants of Criollo Oligarchy and the Freemasonry of Scottish Rite) that tried to be in line with Catholic Integralism promovated by Pope Pius IX. Some of them backed Maximilian I of Mexico and recognised him as a true ruler in the condition of restoring New Spain institutionallity (included the restoration of Nahuatl and other indigeneous language as officials of the state and the legal protection of the Republica de Indios), the Confessional state and the confiscated properties of the Catholic Church in Mexico and of the Indigenous Rural Communities (restoring Repartimento for indigenous communities that lacked legal property and ejido). However the majority were desilussionated because the Regalist ideologies on Maximilian (in conflict with Clericalists and Ultramontanists) and his sympathy towards towards Recent Liberal reforms to develop a Modern state (but also in conflict with Liberal Mexicans due to oppose legal uniformity).[56] Although, Maximilian through time was pushed by his Political Assessors and Councelors to approve Traditionalists demands (like restoring the officiality of Siete Partidas and Novísima Recopilación legal codes, or annulling for peasants the forced transition to a regime liberal of Private Property and also the State Monopoly over Public services, restoring the capacity of the Church and the indigenous corporations of "caciques" and "cabildos" to provide it) if he wanted to have support from the anti-republican masses, which he did after the quit of French forces in Mexico and the USA involvement in support of Liberal Party, but those traditionalists reforms (which involucrated a new Concordat with Holy See, more near to Integralist positions by renouncing to Patronato real)[57] [58] were too late to increase his support outside of the nearest rural areas in South Mexico. Although Maximilian personally wasn't a pro-Hispanic Traditionalist, as he also wasn't a Liberal, instead being more near to Enlightened Despot (closer to Bourbon Reformism, but with Josephinist revisions) who would try to take advantage of the elements of Tradition and Modernity, taking a lot of time some measures that contradicted classical and economic Liberalism by drawing on the "old" Indian legislation in addition of Cameralism (very popular in the Traditional Germanic Monarchies, giving importance to small peasant property compared to the lordly latifundia), expressed in the Urbarium Code of 1767 (which established the plots of the Hungarian peasants and prohibited their lord from seizing them), while also taking measures that contradicted Traditionalism by adhering to "modern" proposals of the utopian Socialism from the rural but enlightened proletariat (since Maximilian was influenced by Victor Considerant)[59] [60] [61] [62] in addition to Liberal Catholicism (which put him in conflict with the Papacy and on the verge of being declared a heretic or excommunicated due to syncretism with Modernist heresy, Jansenist and Gallicanist heresy).[63] [64] [65] [66]
Also in XX century there were some Cristeros that were influenced by Carlism and supported the restoration of Traditional Monarchy on Mexico (even considering the reunification of Mexico with Spain in a Composite monarchy under the rule of Carlist Pretender),[67] and XXI century there has been some "hermanamientos" between Carlists (of the Comunión Tradicionalista Carlista) and Cristeros of Monarchist tendency in their common support to Social Kingship of Christ and Panhispanism
See also: Miguelist, Integralismo Lusitano and Patrianovism. This refers to the supporters for the restoration of Portuguese Empire form of government (before Pombalist reforms introducing Enlightened absolutism in Kingdom of Portugal) around Lusosphere countries
Some schoolars believes that the first signs of Traditionalist Monarchists appeared on Portuguese Restoration War in reaction of a perceived Spanish absolutism.[69] However, the first formal expression of its defense was by the Miguelists during the Liberal Wars and its consequence through XIX Century. Then appeared in XX Century the Traditionalist and Integralist Catholic movement of Integralismo Lusitano (which have influence of Maurrassisme, and also influenced Spanish Integrists). Both Miguelists and Lusitan Integralists had a philosophical continuity with Catholic social teaching and Thomist conception of Natural law.[70] Also there were some traditionalists factions in non-Miguelists groups, like the Ação Realista Portuguesa (which advocated the restoration of Traditional Monarchy under Manuel II of Portugal instead of Duarte Nuno, Duke of Braganza). During the fall of Estado Novo, there were some political movements, like Movimento de Ação Portuguesa, that supported Traditionalist Monarchim as an alternative against Salazarism and Portuguese transition to democracy.Current Portuguese Monarchists that support Traditionalist Monarchism are the following groups:
Notable figures in defense of Portuguese Traditional Monarchy through history were Miguel I of Portugal, José Acúrsio das Neves, António Ribeiro dos Santos, José Osório da Gama e Castro, José Agostinho de Macedo, Fortunato de São Boaventura, Francisco Antonio da Cunha de Pina Manique Miguel Sotto-Mayor, Pierre-Alexandre-Marie Thébaudin de Bordigné, Antonio Sardinha, Pequito Rebelo, Hipolito Raposo, Rui Ennes Ulrich, Alfredo Pimenta, Leão Ramos Ascensão, Almeida Braga, Caetano Beirão, Xavier Cordeiro, António Cabral, Freitas Branco, João Ameal, Lourenço Pereira Coutinho, Valentim Rodrigues. On contemporary era there are important figures like[78] Gonçalo Sampaio e Mello, Leonor Raposo, Manuel Vieira da Cruz, Jose Manuel Quintas.
During Brazilian empire era, there were Brazilians that were supporters of Miguelist and were against the Brazilian Constitutionalism for being too liberal, while also rejected Brazilian nationalism as artificial, wanting to reverse Independence of Brazil and seeing Brazilian Monarchy as non legit, desiring to restore United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves.[79]
Contemporaneous Brazilian Monarchists (which considerers Pedro II of Brazil as last legit monarch) that support the model of Traditional Monarchy are the ones related to the followers of Patrianovism political legacy, which were influenced by Portuguese Integralism.[80] The Brazilian pretender, Bertrand of Orléans-Braganza, is a supporter of the model.[81] 3] Actual Brazilian monarchists groups that advocates for Tradtionalist Corporatist Monarchy are the Ação Orleanista.[82] Also there are Carlists in Brazil, like the "Circulo Cultural Jose Pedro Gavlvao de Sousa".[83]
This refers to the supports for the restoration of Kingdom of France form of government based in Ancien régime corporatist institutionallity (before instauration of Absolutism, rejecting Jean Bodin's conception of Monarchy) around Francophone countries.
See also: Legitimists, Action Française, Ultra-royalist and Catholic and Royal Armies. Monarchists in France that support the restoration of traditionalist monarchical model are the ones that considers themselves heirs of Ultra-royalist and Counter-revolutionary political thought of the Catholic and Royal Armies (like the expressed on Vendean genocide) against the totalising vision of political and social order that appeared on the French Revolution and defending that society was 'constituted' itself (not needing a Written constitution to arbitrarily defines such natural and organic constitution of Uncodified and Metaphysical nature) and that Liberal individualism and intrusions from the modern state (since Henry IV Centralisation) should be rejected for being unnecesary and artificial impositions. Also Traditionalist Monarchists have an Historiography of the French Revolution in which they believe that existed a legitimate monarchical movement of reform (based in Catholic League and Dévots opposition to Absolutist legacy of the Politiques and Huguenots) that was usurped by the French revolutionaries and the Freemasonry.[84] Initially all of their followers were on the Legitimist faction until the deaht of Henri V (Count of Chambord) pretender without heirs, which provocated that traditionalist monarchism was also assimilated by "fusionists" Orleanists (factions that renegated July Monarchy's liberal reforms and usurpation, but saw Prince Philippe (Count of Paris) as the legit sucessor of French Throne and the House of Orléans with the duty to restore Traditional Monarchy) and then so appeared traditionalist factions on Orleanist supporters, like the Maurrassisme and Integral nationalist movement. Moreover, after Pope Leo XIII, some of Traditionalists Monarchists tried to participate in Republican institutionality, developing some political associations like Breton Regionalist Union.
Most of their followers actually are supporters of Louis XX pretension, and propper Louis has stated he supports Traditional Monarchy. However, there are also traditionalist on the ultra-conservatist section of the supporters of Jean, Count of Paris, like the Action Française. Foreign traditionalism monarchical groups, like Carlism, has declared his support for Traditionalist faction of Orleanists (although rejecting Action Française factions that supports condemned ideologies by the Catholic Church, like Nationalism and the Positivist elements of Maurrassisme)
Notable figures in defense of French Traditional Monarchy have been René de La Tour du Pin, Charles Maurras, Jacob-Nicolas Moreau, François-Xavier de Feller, Emmanuel Louis Marie, François-René de Chateaubriand, Joseph Alexis Walsh, Albert Marie de Mun, Jacques Piou, Régis de l'Estourbeillon, Patrice de MacMahon, Hubert Lyautey, Pierre Chaunu, Régine Pernoud.
This refers fro the supports for the restoration of Medieval England,Scotland and Ireland mechanism of government (Kingdom of England, Scotland and Ireland before Acts of Union 1707 and Acts of Union 1800, along rejecting English Revolution political legacy and Whig history).
See also: Jacobitism, Neo-Jacobite Revival, Legitimist Jacobite League of Great Britain and Ireland, Order of the White Rose (1886–1915), Royal Stuart Society and Tory. British supporters of Traditionalist Monarchy are mostly followers of Jacobitist political though, or Tory linked with Devolution in the United Kingdom, despite that not everyone are supporters of Neo-Jacobite pretenders or the Royal Stuart Society, nor the House of Windsor actual policies. British traditionalists support the restoration of descentralized Union of crowns political union on United Kingdom and also the Executive power of the British Monarch (although before Henry VIII Absolutist model). The essence of their conception of the monarchy is in the respect for Scottish, Gaelic and Welsh freedoms and institutions (considering that Parliamentarianism and Common law imposed after English Revolution was against true liberty and social representation), as well as in the religious freedom of Irish Catholics and the reivindication of Romano-British and Celtic Christianity and culture instead of supremacy of Anglo-Saxon culture, spirituality and law.[85] [86] Some of British traditionalists are Anglicans of High church that supports a theological renovation based in Anglo-Catholicism and Anglo-Orthodoxy, and against Evangelical Anglicanism for being too Reformed. Others have been Scottish and English catholics like G. K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc. Historically the British Traditionalists have had support among Scottish clans (specially on Scottish Highlands) and Irish clans, along English nobility sympathyzer of Tory movement (which were a bit common during Victorian era).[87]
Also, there were Jacobites (like Bertram Ashburnham,[88] Roy Campbell) that allied to Carlists and supported their model of Monarchy as an equivalent to the one on Jacobitean political thought.[89]
See also: Monarchism in the United States. On the United States, after the defeat of Jacobite risings, a lot of Jacobites (mostly Scottish immigrants) Exiled themselves to British America through XVIII century, and in the Thirteen Colonies they settled mostly on New York and North Carolina Colony and engaged themselves with political and legal issues of the Colonial Society, although keeping their political beliefs in secret due to the repression of British Empire and the hostility of Anti-Catholic Protestants that were majoritarian due to Propaganda campaign (which spreaded the perception of Scottish and Catholics as brutes).[90] In the context of American Revolutionary War, most of Jacobites (like Allan Maclean of Torloisk, Hugh Mercer) were Loyalists that desired to mantain the union with the British crown and wait for a House of Stuart restoration (or to George III carry out political reforms) to Guarantee Autonomy of British Americans, in reaction to the liberal ideology of republicanism in Patriots (Whigs) and the stablishmen of a different american nation as such project was perceived too artificial and revolutionary in nature. So, American Jacobites enlisted in the 84th Regiment of Foot (Royal Highland Emigrants), 71st Regiment of Foot, Fraser's Highlanders or 42nd Regiment of Foot.
On recent times, there are Traditionalist Monarchist groups like the Legitimist League of American Jacobites, although are very marginal. Also there are Carlist Circles in former Spanish North America (modern Southwestern United States), like the "Circulo Carlista Camino Real de Texas".[91]
There are Monarchists in Poland, based in Catholic social teaching and Thomistic philosophy, that supports the model of Traditional Monarchy and the restoration of Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth institutionallity before Constitution of 3 May 1791 liberal reforms, while also criticising the worst aspects of Golden Liberty system (like Liberum veto) that provocated the Partitions of Poland. Some of this Traditionalist Monarchists groups (which calls themselves "Rojaliści") are the Conservative-Monarchist Club, Confederation of the Polish Crown, the Monarchist-Reactionary Union[92] and the Organisation of Monarchic Poles,[93] along the Newspaper "Lojalni dla Polski" (Loyalty to Poland)[94] . Some Polish referents in defense of Traditional Monarchy have been Jacek Bartyzel, Norbert Wójtowicz.
There are Monarchists in Czech Republic that defends the Traditional Monarchy based in Christian Integralism, Medieval Corporatism (includying Czech Traditionalist social organization, like Bohemian Estates of Bohemia-Moravia-Silesia, Bohemian Agrarian system or organic democracy through Hetman system)[95] and Blessed Karl's aspirations to reform Austria-Hungary in a Danubian Monarchical Confederation[96] based in Catholic social teaching and Traditionalist doctrine.
The largest group is Koruna Česká (declaring itself as both anti-communist and anti-liberal, while wanting a "Parliamentary monarchy" based in Estates of the realm),[97] [98] although a schism occurred in which the most conservative factions created their own "authentically traditionalist" movement, called Monarchist Civic Association (Monarchistické Občanské Sdružení/MONOS in Czech language), due to dissagrements with KC leadership for wanting to develop a "Traditionalist Constitutionalism" instead of rejecting Semi-constitutional monarchy, while also propossing a Confessional state but with Separation of church and state, among other postures near to Liberal conservatism and Atlanticism.[99] Another ones are the Association of Moravian Monarchists.[100] Some aristocrats of Czech nobility, like House of Schwarzenberg, have supported them. Non-Political Parties, like, St. Wenceslas Crown Academy,[101] Royal Moravian Order of Knights of Saint Rostislav and Columbanus,[102] etc. reivindicates and support the traditionalist monarchical institutions.
Many Sociological analysis considers that the Traditional Monarchy have had historical conditions associated with the defense of those institutions that are guarantors of their continued independence against Western modernism (on Third World) and Bourgeois revolution or Proletarian revolution (on Western and Eastern civilization), along Social unit between different peoples that have Social cohesion under a pact of loyalt to a Traditional Monarchy (rejecting the Nationalist ideologies from Elitist origin because the menace of Political fragmentation of Multinational states). The traditionalist monarchical Sociology generated fascinating problems on the Social analysis from the defenders of Modernization theory due to showing Paradigms against the dogmas of Progresivist Historicism about a constant political superation through Secularization and Centralisation (like Whig history, Positivist sociology, Historical materialism and other hegemonic Historiographies about the fall of Ancien régime or Feudal Mode of production). So, the Traditional Monarchy movement isn't against Social Progress or Industrialisation as have been pejoratively accused, but is against an Accelerationist aproach of Progress that could menace Customary laws, Corporatist Mechanism (like Municipal corporation on Rural areas, Religious institutions or Local government, that are menaced by Centralized government with their forced Urbanization, Secularism and Nationalization from both Capitalist and Proletarian states) and specially Traditional values, all of them rejected by Modern philosophiers if those don't adjust to their Ideology. The fall and decadence of Traditional Monarchy should be atribuited by Western Imperialism ideological influence and Political conspiracy from well-accomodated classes or organizations (like Bourgeoisie or Syndicates, both with origin on Urban area) that concentrates the political power, rather than Social movements against a Closed mind Oligarchical Elite. Also the defense of Traditional Monarchy from Common people can't be associated with ignorance and manipulation, but to a very well-defined awareness of their interests as social groups that reject such modernizing processes that seek to concentrate power in a State that detriments their local institutions and values, which are protected by the corporate institutionality and mechanist of the Traditional Monarchy (in which the Monarch is a guarantor not only of stability, but of political continuity with historical traditions and forms of government, that can't be suited by Political parties with their different interests and possibility of sectarianism).[103] Among Criticers of democracy, some Medievalist have considered that in Traditional Monarchy there was a "Organic Democracy" through the Intermediate Bodies that wer better Social organization and Institutionality than modern Representative democracy and Political parties to protect the Popular interests of diverse Social groups, avoiding the appeareance of Absolutist regimes, Cyclical Economical Crisis, Sectarian divisions through Partisans, or the Rise of Totalitarian Dictatorships due to Ideology that have caracterised Modern world since the Renaissance, and specially after Atlantic Revolutions, caused by Modernization process and Political revolution.[104]