In the famous song of A. Pugacheva there are words: “All can be kings”, but is it really so? In some countries, kings have absolute power (absolute monarchy), while in others their title is only a tribute to traditions and real possibilities are very limited (parliamentary monarchy).
There are mixed options, in which, on the one hand, there is a representative body that exercises legislative power, but the powers of the king or emperor are quite large.
Despite the fact that this form of government is considered less democratic than the republic, some monarchy states, such as Great Britain or Japan, are powerful, influential players in the modern political arena. Due to the fact that recently in Russian society the idea of restoring autocracy is being discussed (at least some priests of the Russian Orthodox Church advocate such an idea), we will examine in more detail the features of each of its types.
Absolute monarchy
As the name says, the head of state is not limited to any other authorities. From a legal point of view, a classical monarchy of this type does not exist in the modern world. Almost every country in the world has one or another representative authority. However, in some Muslim countries, the monarch actually has absolute and unlimited power. Examples include Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and others.
Parliamentary monarchy
Most accurately, this type of autocracy can be described as follows: "The king reigns, but does not rule." This form of government presupposes a democratic constitution. All legislative power is in the hands of a representative body. Formally, the monarch remains the head of the country, but in reality his powers are very limited.
For example, the British monarch is obliged to sign laws, but at the same time has no right to veto them. It performs only ceremonial and representative functions. And in Japan, the constitution explicitly prohibits the emperor from interfering in governing the country. Parliamentary monarchy is a tribute to established traditions. The government in such countries is formed by members of the parliamentary majority, and even if the king or emperor is formally its head, all the same, in fact, he bears responsibility only to parliament. Despite the seemingly archaic nature, the parliamentary monarchy is present in many countries, including such developed and influential states as Great Britain, Japan, as well as Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Australia, Jamaica, Canada, etc. This type of power is directly opposite to the previous one.
Dualistic monarchy
On the one hand, in such countries there is a legislative body, and on the other, it is completely subordinate to the head of state. The monarch chooses a government and, if necessary, can dissolve parliament. Usually he himself draws up a constitution, which is called octroized, that is, he is granted or granted. The power of the monarch in such states is very strong, while his powers are not always described in legal documents. Examples include Morocco and Nepal. In Russia, this form of power was in the period from 1905 to 1917.
Does Russia need a monarchy?
The issue is controversial and complex. On the one hand, it gives strong power and unity, and on the other, is it possible to entrust the fate of such a huge country in the hands of one person? In a recent vote, slightly less than a third of Russians (28%) have nothing against it if the monarch becomes the head of state again. But a large part nevertheless favored a republic, the key feature of which is election. Still, the lessons of history were not in vain.
