866) The Abolition of Absolute Monarchy in the Modern Era. _ Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman

 https://docs.google.com/document/d/146DxlEeiSHbDZDapgeWpTInWnb-tO02HoqRYLqKm6ZI/edit?usp=drivesdk

866) The Abolition of Absolute Monarchy in the Modern Era. _ Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman https://mywritingsjunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2019/12/about-me-junayed-ashrafur-rahman.html ✒ 

One. The Concept and Historical Position of Absolute Monarchy.

Monarchy can generally be divided into two categories according to the degree of limitation on power: absolute monarchy and constitutional monarchy. The defining feature of absolute monarchy is that supreme power rests solely with the sovereign, without any effective constitutional or parliamentary constraints. In history, the declaration of the French king Louis XIV, "I am the state," is regarded as the archetypal statement of absolute monarchy. Constitutional monarchy is a system in which the sovereign's power is limited by a constitution or convention, actual governing power rests with parliament and the cabinet, and the sovereign serves only as a formal or symbolic head of state.

Historically, absolute monarchy played a positive role in the early stages of state formation. Through centralized power, it helped eliminate feudal fragmentation, establish national unity, and promote legal order and stability. The administrative and legal reforms that took place in various European countries in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries depended to a considerable extent on the patronage of royal power. The reforms of Frederick II of Prussia, Peter the Great of Russia, and Joseph II of Austria are representative examples of this trend. However, the inherent flaw of absolute monarchy is that a system of hereditary succession offers no guarantee of producing a good ruler, and autocratic rule is fundamentally incompatible with democracy, which can easily lead to social instability.

From the late eighteenth century onward, the legitimacy of absolute monarchy faced fundamental challenges. The Enlightenment directly attacked the divine right of kings and hereditary autocracy. Montesquieu's theory of the separation of powers and Rousseau's concept of the general will weakened the theoretical foundations of absolute monarchy. The French Revolution of 1789 shook the foundations of absolute monarchy in Europe. In the nineteenth century, amid waves of constitutional and nationalist movements across Europe, many monarchies were forced to transition to constitutional frameworks or were overthrown outright. The wave of European revolutions in 1848 confronted monarchies across almost the entire continent with the choice of reform or fall. By the beginning of the twentieth century, absolute monarchy had nearly disappeared in Europe.

Two. The Current Global Reality of Monarchy.

At present, there are approximately 43 sovereign states in the world that recognize monarchy as the office of head of state. By geographic distribution: Asia has the most with 13, Europe has 12, the Americas have 9, Oceania has 6, and Africa has 3. However, the nature of these monarchies varies completely. Most are constitutional monarchies, in which the sovereign performs only formal duties while actual power rests with elected governments and parliaments. The monarchies of the United Kingdom, Japan, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and other countries have been fully integrated into constitutional frameworks.

The countries that genuinely maintain absolute monarchy are extremely few. According to reports in the Russian media, four states have been identified as genuine absolute monarchies: Saudi Arabia, Brunei, Oman, and Eswatini. Some sources also include Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and the Vatican, though statistics vary due to differences in the definitional boundaries. This essay focuses its main discussion on four representative countries.

Three. The Core Question: Why Should Absolute Monarchy Persist in a Handful of Countries When the World Runs on Democracy and Globalization.

The central question of this essay is: when the entire world is governed on the basis of democracy and globalization, what justification is there for absolute monarchy to survive in a handful of countries? Why should just a few families monopolize vast wealth, with military force as the sole means of protecting it?

This question can be analyzed on three levels.

First, global democracy and globalization are not a homogeneous process. Globalization increases economic integration but does not guarantee uniformity of political systems. In the international order, the legitimacy of intervening in a sovereign state's choice of internal governance system is limited. The United Nations Charter establishes the principles of sovereign equality and non-interference in internal affairs, which narrows the legal and political paths for overthrowing absolute monarchy from outside.

Second, the remaining absolute monarchies are supported by vast natural resources—particularly oil and gas. These resources generate a revenue stream that allows for massive funding of the military and security forces while simultaneously pacifying political discontent through welfare benefits for citizens. This "resource-supported stability" model is evident in Saudi Arabia, Brunei, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. Military force here is not only a means of repression but also the foundation of the state welfare system.

Third, the protection of geopolitical interests. Western powers have long viewed the Gulf monarchies as partners in energy security and regional balance. Because of these strategic relationships, criticism on democracy and human rights often takes a back seat to economic and security interests. As a result, international pressure is not effectively applied.

Four. Analysis of Governance Flaws in Various Countries' Monarchies.

Saudi Arabia: Extreme centralization of power. Saudi Arabia is the largest absolute monarchy by area. The country has no constitution in the classical sense; the Quran, the Sunnah, and the Basic Law serve as its constitutional framework. All 150 members of the Consultative Council are appointed. The current King Salman has effectively withdrawn due to age, and actual power rests with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Political power and control over major economic decisions are concentrated in the hands of the royal family and its close associates. The labor market relies heavily on foreign workers. Welfare benefits for citizens serve primarily as a tool to maintain the monarchy's legitimacy. The lack of channels for political participation means there is no legitimate outlet for social discontent. The 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi drew widespread international condemnation and made clear the lack of accountability in the governing system. In 2026, UN experts condemned the execution of individuals for crimes committed as minors in Saudi Arabia, evidence of judicial arbitrariness.

Brunei: The extreme form of personal rule. Brunei has maintained a state of emergency since 1962. Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah has ruled since 1967, simultaneously serving as prime minister, defense minister, finance minister, and foreign minister. All 45 seats in the legislature are appointed. There is no boundary between state power and personal power; legislative, executive, and judicial powers rest in the same person. In 2019, the introduction of stoning to death for homosexuality under Sharia law drew severe international criticism, exposing the arbitrariness of the governing system and the weakness of human rights protections.

Oman: A closed political system. Oman is an extremely closed state. Sultan Haitham assumed power in 2020, and in 2021 the position of crown prince was created for the first time in the country's history. There are no political parties, and parliament plays only an advisory role. Political participation and freedom of expression are severely restricted. The trial of members of the so-called "secret movement" in 2012 and the suppression of labor protests reveal the repressive nature of this system.

Eswatini: The extreme example of absolute monarchy. King Mswati III has ruled since 1986, political parties are banned, and the king directly appoints the prime minister, part of parliament, and judges of the High Court. Political competition is completely prohibited, opposition is suppressed, and human rights violations are frequent. In 2021, the security forces' harsh response to protests and the prosecution of lawyers and workers drew condemnation from international human rights organizations. The country has one of the highest HIV infection rates in the world, yet the government does not invest adequately in public health, evidence of the distorted priorities of the governing system. According to World Bank data, Eswatini's unemployment rate stands at 35.4 percent (2023), and more than half the population lives below the lower-middle-income poverty line.

Vatican: The fusion of religious and state power. The Vatican is the world's only religious absolute monarchy; the pope is simultaneously religious leader and head of state, elected by cardinals, and serves for life. The flaw of this system is that religious authority and state power are fused, and the boundary between religious law and state law is blurred.

Five. Different Paths of Departure from Absolute Monarchy: Historical Examples.

The fall of absolute monarchy was never a single path. The experience of different countries shows that the path of transition varies depending on the domestic balance of power, social pressure, and the international environment.

Britain: Gradual evolution. Britain has one of the oldest constitutional monarchies in the world. The Magna Carta of 1215 established legal limits on royal power, the Glorious Revolution of 1688–89 secured parliamentary sovereignty, and the cabinet system gradually took shape thereafter. The Act of Settlement of 1701 brought the rules of royal succession under parliamentary control. In this evolution, the dynasty was not overthrown through violent revolution; instead, the sovereign gradually lost actual governing power and became a formal head of state. The feature of this model is low bloodshed and institutional continuity, but the timeframe is long, spanning several centuries.

Japan: Revolution from above under external pressure. Japan's transition is clearly connected to its defeat in World War II. With the introduction of the new constitution in 1946, the prewar absolute monarchy was transformed into a symbolic emperor system, and sovereignty was transferred from the emperor to the Japanese people. This change, carried out under the direction of the occupying forces, defined the emperor as "the symbol of the state and of the unity of the people," stripped of actual governing power. The new Imperial House Law transferred the emperor's property to the state, making the emperor dependent on parliamentary appropriations.

Nepal: Dissolution after internal conflict. The 2001 royal family massacre damaged the popularity of the monarchy, and King Gyanendra's direct rule increased opposition. After the 2006 peace agreement, the Maoists joined politics and emerged as the largest party in elections. In May 2008, the Constituent Assembly voted by constitutional majority to abolish the 239-year-old monarchy, with only 4 of 601 members opposed. The royal palace was turned into a museum, and the king retired as an ordinary citizen.

Iran: Overthrow through religious revolution. The Pahlavi dynasty had long maintained absolute monarchy, but modernization and Westernization intensified social divisions. The Islamic Revolution of 1979 overthrew the monarchy, and Iran became an Islamic republic. This case shows that when the modernizing efforts of an absolute monarchy merge with Westernization and collide with local culture and religious tradition, they can give birth to revolution.

Libya: Overthrow through military coup. King Idris I was deposed in a military coup in 1961, and the monarchy was abolished. This case shows that even an absolute monarchy supported by oil wealth can face instability from the military.

Ethiopia: Military coup and socialist transformation. Emperor Haile Selassie I had long maintained absolute monarchy, but was deposed in a military coup in 1974, the monarchy was abolished, and the country was directed onto a socialist path.

Romania: Overthrow through popular uprising. The extreme autocratic rule of Nicolae Ceaușescu was overthrown in a popular uprising in 1989; he and his wife were executed. This case shows that when absolute monarchy merges with personal dictatorship, the violence of revolution intensifies.

Spain: Constitutional transition after Franco's death. After Franco's authoritarian rule, constitutional monarchy was reestablished under King Juan Carlos I, and a transition to democracy took place. This model shows that after the end of absolute monarchy, constitutional monarchy can serve as a transitional arrangement.

Six. Military Force and Monopolization of Wealth: A Structural Analysis.

The second part of the question—why should just a few families monopolize vast wealth solely through military force—requires analysis.

In absolute monarchies, there is no clear boundary between state wealth and the royal family's wealth. Saudi Arabia's oil revenues, Brunei's gas and investment income, Eswatini's royal lands—in these cases, it is difficult to distinguish between state assets and the interests of the ruling family. This wealth is used to fund the military and security forces, which in turn serve as the instrument for protecting the governing system. This cycle is self-preserving: wealth buys military power, and military power protects wealth.

However, the weakness of this model is its dependence on the value of the resources. If oil prices fall in the long term or demand for oil declines due to the global energy transition, revenues will contract. If welfare benefits must then be cut or military spending reduced, the stability of the governing system will be at risk. Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 and its efforts at economic diversification are evidence of this recognized risk. During the oil price collapse of 2014–2016, Saudi Arabia's foreign exchange reserves fell significantly, and the government was forced to cut subsidies and impose new taxes, direct evidence of this dependence.

Seven. Harm to the People in Countries with Absolute Monarchy.

(1) Systematic denial of political rights and fundamental freedoms

The most fundamental harm of absolute monarchy is the systematic denial of the people's right to political participation. In Saudi Arabia, political parties, trade unions, and independent civil society organizations are banned by law; all 150 members of the Consultative Council are appointed. All 45 seats in Brunei's legislature are appointed, and a state of emergency has been in force since 1962. In Eswatini, political parties cannot participate in elections, and the king directly appoints the prime minister, part of parliament, and High Court judges. These arrangements mean that the people cannot change the government through peaceful means, cannot question government policy, and cannot even protest organized human rights violations.

(2) Structural limits on economic opportunity and social mobility

In absolute monarchies, economic wealth is concentrated in the hands of the royal family and its close associates, and ordinary people's economic opportunities are structurally limited. In Saudi Arabia, about two-thirds of employed citizens work in the public sector, and public-sector wage spending accounts for nearly half of government expenditure. This employment structure appears stable but in fact hinders the development of the private sector and human capital. Youth unemployment has long remained at a high level. In Eswatini, the unemployment rate is 35.4 percent (2023), and more than half the population lives below the poverty line.

(3) Fragility of social security and the crisis of the "welfare for loyalty" contract

The Gulf monarchies have long maintained a "welfare for loyalty" social contract: the people give up political rights, and in return the government provides subsidies and welfare from oil revenues. But this model depends heavily on oil prices. After the oil price collapse of 2014, Saudi Arabia was forced to introduce a value-added tax (VAT) and cut fuel and water subsidies; water prices rose by about 500 percent, meaning they became nearly six times the original price. During the 2020 pandemic, Saudi Arabia tripled the VAT and suspended the cost-of-living allowance for public employees, severely affecting middle- and lower-income families.

(4) Restrictions on the rights of women and minority groups

In Saudi Arabia, the male guardianship system over women long prevailed, requiring a male relative's approval for women's education, employment, travel, and marriage. Although some reforms have been made in recent years, the core structure of the male guardianship system has not been completely abolished. In Eswatini, repression of political opponents is more direct; during the pro-democracy protests of 2021, security forces used lethal force, and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko was killed in 2023.

Eight. Harm to the Global Market in Countries with Absolute Monarchy.

(1) Unequal market access and distortion of competition

In absolute monarchies, the boundary between state wealth and the royal family's wealth is blurred, which distorts the fairness of market competition. In the Gulf countries, state-owned enterprises and sovereign wealth funds dominate the market. According to statistics, in the UAE, Bahrain, Oman, and Qatar, the state sector (including sovereign wealth funds, government financial institutions, and ministries) controls more than 80 percent of stock market capitalization; in Saudi Arabia the figure is 73 percent. These state institutions enjoy special advantages in resource extraction, cheap energy, land, and financing, leaving private firms at a competitive disadvantage.

(2) Lack of regulatory transparency and accountability

The transparency of Saudi Arabia's regulatory system has long been a concern for international investors. The U.S. State Department's 2026 investment climate report noted that Saudi government agencies often issue rules without industry consultation, and stakeholder consultation mechanisms are generally opaque and not codified in law. In the judicial system, commercial disputes are often handled by administrative bodies within ministries, foreign court judgments are not consistently enforced, and the Sharia compliance review of arbitral awards is lengthy with uncertain outcomes.

(3) Dependence on oil prices and transmitted risk to the global economy

The economies of the Gulf monarchies depend heavily on oil prices, and this dependence creates transmitted instability in the global economy. Saudi Arabia's 2026 budget deficit is projected at 165 billion riyals (about 44 billion U.S. dollars), roughly 3.3 percent of GDP, as oil prices and production have affected revenues. Saudi Arabia has announced that a "planned deficit" policy will continue until 2028, revealing long-term fiscal risk.

(4) Labor rights and conflict with international business standards

The Gulf countries rely heavily on foreign workers, but the protection of these workers' rights is weak. Saudi Arabia's labor market depends heavily on foreign workers, and foreign workers are often outside the social security system. According to UN data, only 24.5 percent of Saudi citizens aged 60 and over receive contributory pensions, and non-citizen residents (41.6 percent of the population) are largely outside the formal social security system. This lack of labor rights creates conflict with international business standards.

Nine. Benefits to the People of the Relevant Countries if Absolute Monarchy Is Abolished.

(1) Restoration of political rights and establishment of accountability

If absolute monarchy is abolished, the first benefit the people of the relevant countries will receive is fundamental political rights. Free and fair elections, freedom to form political parties, freedom of speech, and freedom of organization are the fundamental mechanisms for holding rulers accountable to the people. Historical experience shows that when there is no alternative to absolute monarchy, the quality of governance depends entirely on the personal qualities of the ruler. Establishing representative government allows the people to change rulers through peaceful means and to correct erroneous policies.

(2) Fairness in wealth distribution and expansion of economic opportunity

If absolute monarchy is abolished, state wealth will no longer be treated as the royal family's wealth but will be used for the public good. Oil revenues will no longer serve to protect the royal family's luxury and military repression but can be invested in education, health care, infrastructure, and social security. For Saudi Arabia, this means that the reforms of Vision 2030 can genuinely meet the needs of the people. Women's labor force participation rose from 22.8 percent in 2016 to 35 percent in 2025, showing that there is demand for reform in Saudi society. But without a system of political representation, the priorities and pace of reform depend entirely on the ruler's will.

(3) Transformation of social security from "welfare favor" to "right"

In absolute monarchy, welfare benefits are the ruler's "favor," which can be withdrawn at any time. In a democratic system, social security becomes a citizen's right and is not revoked when the government changes. Saudi Arabia's experience shows that after oil prices fell, the government could easily decide to cut subsidies and impose new taxes, with the people having no legitimate means of protest. In a representative government, such decisions would face the constraints of electoral politics, and the government would have to explain the impact of its policies and seek alternatives.

Ten. Benefits to Humanity if Absolute Monarchy Is Abolished.

(1) Establishment of the universal principle of human rights

The persistence of absolute monarchy means that the international community tolerates a system in which fundamental human rights are systematically violated. Imprisonment for publicly exercising freedom of speech in Saudi Arabia, the stoning-to-death provision for homosexuality under Sharia criminal law in Brunei, and the suppression of political opponents in Eswatini—these violations are not merely the problems of the countries concerned but challenges to the entire human rights system. If absolute monarchy is abolished, the principles established in the UN human rights covenants will be more widely implemented.

(2) Increased legitimacy of the global governance system

The international community's tolerance of absolute monarchy reveals a double standard in the global governance system. Western powers often soften their criticism of democracy and human rights in the Gulf monarchies because of energy security and geopolitical interests. This double standard weakens the moral authority of the international community. If absolute monarchy is abolished, the international community can take a more consistent position on the principles of human rights and democracy.

(3) Establishment of a long-term foundation for regional stability

The stability of absolute monarchy is externally stable but internally fragile. Saudi Arabia's youth unemployment, Eswatini's extreme poverty, and Brunei's lack of economic diversification are temporarily suppressed through repression and welfare distribution but are not structurally resolved. Establishing representative government can address these problems gradually through the political process and build a foundation for long-term stability.

Eleven. Benefits to Globalization if Absolute Monarchy Is Abolished.

(1) Full global market competition and efficient allocation of resources

The persistence of absolute monarchy distorts the global market. State-owned enterprises dominate the market through political connections, and private firms and foreign investors do not have equal competitive opportunities. If democratic systems are established in these countries, regulatory transparency will increase, barriers to market entry will be reduced, and foreign investment will enjoy a fairer competitive environment.

(2) Integration of the global labor market and liberation of human capital

In absolute monarchies, the economic potential of women and young people is systematically limited. Although women's labor force participation in Saudi Arabia has increased, it remains below international standards. In Eswatini, youth unemployment exceeds 35 percent, and a large number of young people cannot utilize their labor potential. Political and social reform will expand educational and employment opportunities for these groups, and more human capital will flow into the global labor market.

(3) Diversification of global resources and acceleration of the energy transition

The economies of the Gulf monarchies depend heavily on oil, and this dependence slows their economic diversification reforms. Because oil revenues provide the royal family with sufficient funds for repression and welfare, the sense of urgency for reform is reduced. In a democratic system, the government must be accountable to the people for economic security and employment opportunities, which will drive economic diversification more vigorously. Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 has made some progress, with the non-oil sector contributing about 55 percent of GDP. But without a system of political representation, the pace and priorities of this transition depend entirely on the ruler's will.

Twelve. The Role of the International Community and Policy Dialogue.

The end of absolute monarchy does not depend solely on internal processes; the policies of the international community also play an important role. However, the position of the international community is contradictory. On the one hand, absolute monarchy is criticized on the basis of universal values of human rights and democracy; on the other hand, criticism is often softened because of energy security, commercial interests, and regional stability.

The UN human rights system and various international human rights organizations regularly highlight human rights violations in absolute monarchies. However, the veto power of the permanent members of the Security Council and the principle of sovereign equality limit the international community's capacity for effective intervention. International investment and trade relations are also two-sided. On the one hand, globalization increases investment and technology flows to absolute monarchies, helping to maintain the stability of the governing system; on the other hand, the accountability and transparency standards of the international business community gradually create pressure on the governing system.

Thirteen. Conclusion.

The historical decline of absolute monarchy is a relatively certain trend. Currently, the number of states that genuinely maintain absolute monarchy can be counted on one hand. Behind this decline lie the spread of democratic ideas, the collapse of the colonial system, and the deep influence of globalization. Britain's gradual evolution, Japan's transition under external pressure, Nepal's dissolution after internal conflict, Iran's overthrow through religious revolution, Libya's fall through military coup, and Spain's constitutional transition—these different paths together show that the departure from absolute monarchy does not follow a single model but is the product of specific historical circumstances.

But why does this system survive in a handful of countries—the answer is a self-preserving system built on the monopoly of military force, the massive flow of natural resources, and the connection of geopolitical interests. In this system, there is no boundary between state wealth and the interests of the ruling family; the military is the instrument for protecting wealth, and wealth is the source of funding for the military. This cycle can survive in the age of globalization, but its foundation is narrow and dependent on the value of resources.

The core claim—that absolute monarchy should be abolished so that the people of the relevant countries and humanity as a whole can share in the benefits of globalization—is morally justified. However, how abolition should be accomplished is a complex question. History shows that forced external intervention often creates prolonged instability. A comparatively realistic path is to let the process of globalization create pressure for reform of the wealth distribution system and to gradually erode the foundation of absolute monarchy through the promotion of international governance standards. As a long-term trend, the decline of absolute monarchy and the transformation of global governance are moving in the same direction. ©️All Right Reserved by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman

24°33'58.6"N 90°41'30.4"E

My home Location ✒ https://goo.gl/maps/RoKi3ekrhkm5PAHPA , But I don't live here. Rented out to other people.

Nandail Municipality, Mymensingh, Bangladesh.

Junayedmn1@gmail.com

My Writings ✒ https://www.blogger.com/profile/11734624718328723069

702) My success in writing. (লেখালেখিতে আমার সাফল্য।) – Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman ✒ https://literatureforalljunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2023/06/702-my-success-in-writing-written-by.html

707)After the fantasy of ministry.(মন্ত্রিত্বের ফ্যান্টাসির পরে।)– Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman ✒ https://mytimemyexperiencesjunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2023/06/707after-fantasy-of-ministry-written-by.html

637)Win prizes.(পুরস্কার জিতুন।) - Written by Junayed Ashrafur ✒ https://literatureforalljunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2022/10/637win-prizes-written-by-junayed.html

667)Case against AI ChatGPT. (এআই চ্যাট জিপিটির বিরুদ্ধে মামলা।) – Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman ✒ https://lawforjusticejunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2023/02/667case-against-chat-gpt-written-by.html http://ow.ly/Zawy104u7kO

#Intellectualproperty #Literature #Law #Contract #Writing #Wisdom