Monarchies are not about human rights

OpenGlobalRights has a post titled “Hereditary monarchies are the antithesis of a human rights culture.”

It begins with an idea that many in Thailand seem to neglect and which is the antithesis of the royalist propaganda of recent decades:

The preamble to the UN Charter, a key instrument of international law that binds all 193 member states, reads: “We the Peoples of the United Nations … reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small … to promote social progress and better standards of life.”

The choice of words here is of critical importance. It is the will of the people—not the will of a ruling class or family—that gives a state its legitimacy….

We can see that unelected senators reject this notion.

Focused on the UK, but with relevance for Thailand, it is argues that a “hereditary monarchy impedes the development of a human rights culture in a number of ways,” and lists three:

Firstly, it undermines the rule of law….

Secondly, monarchies are inherently undemocratic….

Thirdly, all members of any royal family are born into a life of unearned privilege….

It also argues that “[f]reedom of expression and assembly are cornerstones of a human rights culture,” but that monarchies inhibit this, as is well known in Thailand.

It concludes that in the 21st century, because they challenge the human rights of citizens, “[t]here is no excuse for them to continue.”