Monarchy vs. Republic: Reflections on the True Social Change Needed

The debate over monarchy and republic has gained momentum in recent years, fueled by growing social discontent and a search for alternatives to traditional power structures. However, it is essential to approach this topic with a critical and reflective perspective, remembering that simply changing a form of government does not guarantee a real transformation in the social and economic structures that govern our lives. Establishing a republic does not automatically imply a profound change in the existing economic system. History has shown us that many republics have perpetuated power structures similar to those of monarchies, maintaining the same social and cultural order that existed beforehand. In many cases, the change in the head of state—from a monarch to an elected figure—has not resulted in a significant reformulation of the values and principles that underpin a society. Proposing a referendum between monarchy and republic may seem, at first glance, a democratic exercise. However, it implies accepting the legitimacy of monarchy as a valid option in the political spectrum. This leads to a dangerous normalization of an institution that, in the eyes of many, is an anachronistic remnant of a feudal past that should have been left behind with the advent of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. The dilemma becomes more complicated when considering that the same defenders of the monarchy could use a referendum as a tool to reaffirm their power. The Royal House, with its network of institutional and media support, could transform a plebiscite into a platform for legitimizing its existence, distorting the true purpose of a popular consultation. In fact, the memory of the NATO referendum resonates in the collective memory, showing how the state machinery can mobilize in favor of specific interests. Despite the emotions this discussion evokes, it is vital to maintain a clear and rational perspective. Rejection of the monarchy should not merely be a matter of aversion to individuals or symbolic figures; it must be a rejection of a system that, in essence, perpetuates inequalities and privileges. The abolition of the monarchy could be a cause for celebration, but this joy must be accompanied by a deeper reflection on the power structures that would remain intact. It is pertinent to remember that the real challenge does not lie solely in the choice between monarchy and republic, but in transforming a system that, at its core, sustains exploitation and inequality. The fight against capitalism, patriarchy, colonialism, and other forms of oppression must be the central axis of any movement seeking significant change in society. The question that arises is: where do we focus our energies and efforts? If the goal is to build a fairer and more equitable future, it is crucial that our struggles center on abolishing the institutions that perpetuate inequality and not merely on changing the face of the head of state. Resistance must be directed toward a model that prioritizes collective well-being over individualism and that promotes social justice instead of the accumulation of privileges. History is rife with examples where superficial change has been celebrated, while the deep structures of power have remained intact. The transition from a monarchy to a republic should be viewed not only as a change of form but as a process that involves a critical review of our institutions and the values that sustain them. Therefore, the current debate over monarchy and republic must go beyond the mere choice of a political system. It involves a deep reflection on how we want to live together in society, what values we want to guide us, and above all, how we can fight for a world where everyone has a voice and where social justice is not just an ideal, but a tangible reality.