For years I've advised my Canadian and Australian friends—both countries that count Elizabeth II as their head of state—against doing away with the monarchy when E2 croaks. Sure, sure: go ahead and sever ties with the British Crown, if those ties makes you feel like complete vassals. (And who can blame you for not wanting Charles III on your money?) But instead of electing some hackass politician as your head of state—and watching the perks, prerogatives, and symbolism of head of state be used and abused by whichever political party happens to hold the office—why not invite Prince Harry over to serve as King of Canada? (You might want to hurry up and ask Harry, Canada, lest Australia takes my advice and beats you to him.) Get rid of the British Royal Family by founding a Canadian Royal Family. Do it because confining head-of-state perks/prerogatives/symbolism to one family, a family that's been neutered politically—a family condemned to an existential hell of ribbon cutting, breeding, and leading the nation in mourning (and putting down a military coup now and then)—is arguably and paradoxically more democratic than our imperial presidency.

So, as a semi-closeted monarchist, I was delighted to see the NYT print an opinion piece this weekend calling on the United States to become a monarchy again, but a constitutional one this time:

That their head of state should be elected by the people is, I imagine, the innate view of almost all American citizens. But at this unquiet hour, they might well wonder whether—for all the wisdom of the founding fathers—their republican system of government is actually leading them toward that promised “more perfect union.” After all, our American cousins have only to direct their gaze toward their northern neighbor to find, in contented Canada, a nation that has for its head of state a hereditary monarch. That example alone demonstrates that democracy is perfectly compatible with constitutional monarchy.

Indeed, the modern history of Europe has shown that those countries fortunate enough to enjoy a king or queen as head of state tend to be more stable and better governed than most of the Continent’s republican states. By the same token, demagogic dictators have proved unremittingly hostile to monarchy because the institution represents a dangerously venerated alternative to their ambitions. Reflecting in 1945 on what had led to the rise of Nazi Germany, Winston Churchill wrote: “This war would never have come unless, under American and modernizing pressure, we had driven the Hapsburgs out of Austria and Hungary and the Hohenzollerns out of Germany.”

“By making these vacuums,” he went on, “we gave the opening for the Hitlerite monster to crawl out of its sewer on to the vacant thrones.”

Go read the whole thing. And, hey, if we invite Harry over and he doesn't work out... there are fixes for that.