The Logan Republican. [volume] (Logan, Utah) 1902-1924, 1919-02-04

monarchical Great Britain, imperial Ja-
pan, and czaristic Russia.
Later we came in, trifle imperialistic
but not monarchical, regular democra-
cy. Italy also was in by that time, an
other imperialistic monarchical demo-
cracy.
What do we mean by democracy?
What just do you mean? Propaganda is
immune from realism and aloof from
facts. We were told that Russia and ia
pan were great democracies fighting
against the central autocracies of Eur
ope. To tell us was to prove it. The czar
was a democrat and the emperor of ia
pan was a democrat and their lands were
democracies.
We find that Great Britain is describ-
ed, defined, referred to constantly as a
democracy, and we accept it as if it were
a fact that Great Britain is democracy.
Great Britain is monarchy. 1t is
monarchy for a profound political rea-
son. 1t is monarchy because king is
needed by the ruling class which Is an
aristocracy.
H. G. Wells asked the British people
why they should continue to have their
kings. Other kings were being put in
the can to await the arrival of the wa
gon. Why should the British retain their
kings and queens?
The question was sufficiently disturb
ing to need attention. Northcliffe or
ganized the answer to it. King George
and Queen Mary made triumphal little
trips about London, route announced in
advance, and the loyalists gathered to
shout.
The British want their king. That is
none of our business. But monarchy
is not democracy, and calling it demo-
cracy does not make it a democracy.
The kingdom of Great Britain has
king and British ruled India has Brit
ish emperor. There is difference be-
tween the government of land which
has no hereditary monarch and land
which has one. There is difference. 1t
is the difference between he United
States and Great Britain. 1t is the differ
ence between democracy and monarchy
1t does not get anywhere to say that
the king of Great Britain and the emper-
or of India has no political power. He
has political power. If he used it direct
ly he might get into trouble. He can use
it indl cectly and use it effectively. Queen
Victoria was decivise political power
Edward VII was decisive political pow
err. George may be less one because he
does not have the commanding personal
ity of the other two rulel-s.
But the British monarch has power be-
cause the British social organization is
a social caste organization. The monarch
is the head of the caste and the top Of the
organization rules the rest of it. A nation
may vote at the bottom and yet be ruled
from the top. Great Britain has parlia-
mentary government which may be as
expressive of popular opinion as our con-
gressionaf government-might even at
times be more responsive to it-but it is
a top governed land and it is top governed
because of its social order.
We do not suggest that the British
ought to dethrone their king. That is
their business. But we may say that SO
long as they have king they cannot
acy and they cannot pro-
perly be called democracy. They will
not be democracy.
The British are satisfied, presumably,
with what they have. We do not say that
it is not the best thing they could have. A
democracy does not acquire virtue by its
acts. But a democracy is democracy.
A monarchy is monarchy. One cannot
be the Other.
The British democracy is not.--Chica-
go Tribune.
N N N