Monarchic Anarchist Theocratic Pluralist Entrepreneurial Socialism

I love "world building" science fiction: The kind where a big sprawling universe is created which includes all kinds of details about the history, culture, sociology, religion, economics, and politics of future society. One frequent form of future society that particularly interests me is a kind of "technological monarchy" which you can find in works such as "The Mote in God's Eye" and Peter Hamilton's "The Night's Dawn Trilogy". This is not a Star Trek style galactic republic, nor a Star Wars style Evil Empire. Rather, it is a form of society that combines monarchy (and often a "State Church") with forms of representative government, with advanced technology, with religious and cultural pluralism, with free market economics, with various socialist policies, to create something really different. Could anything like this ever exist? Could there be a coherent ideology to hold such a system together? Let's see if we can develop a thought experiment to put together a sympathetic worldview which might make this possible.

To clarify this basic political and economic orientation, I want to write a very brief statement which defines these views in clear language. I think I can do this because I am actually sympathetic to a vast number of political and economic positions, from the Libertarian emphasis on free markets and entrepreneurship, to the Marxist critique of unrestrained Capitalism, to Anarchist critiques of Consumerism and Neo-Liberalism, to concerns about corporate control of political systems in late Capitalism (along with endless wars of Empire and the Military Industrial Complex), to the Distributism of CS Lewis, GK Chesterton, and other 20th century Catholics, to the Catholic worker movement and Anglo-Catholic socialism, to admiration for the checks and balances of the United States Constitution and early Federalism, to admiration for the social consistency and sustainability of certain long-lasting Constitutional Monarchies. The following is my attempt to synthesize them into a coherent framework similar to what we find in many works of science fiction:

My basic overarching metaphor for the role of government and economic markets is that of a sport. In a sport, there are at least two competing teams, a playing field or court, and the officials (and their rules) which run the game. The free and fair competition of the teams represent the "free market" of economic activity. This competition can only happen on a field (or court) that is well-maintained and level. Furthermore, it can only happen on the basis of rules and protections that are implemented by impartial referees that have the best interests of all players in mind. The field (or court) represents the collectively owned resources of a society which must be justly distributed to those who can best manage it. The referees represent the elected and appointed officials who are entrusted with the responsibility to govern. There must be checks and balances of power and responsibility between the teams and the referees in their use of the field, or else the sport cannot function. Furthermore, proper functioning of the sport also requires that the referees cannot work in the interest of one of the teams, nor can the teams be controlled by the referees.

In this thought experiment for order to attain this optimal functioning, I think society could be organized in a way that I will label with the ludicrously long name: Monarchic Anarchist Theocratic Pluralist Entrepreneurial Socialism. I will describe these six labels two by two below:

Monarchic Anarchist: Local communities could be self governing and self sustaining, able to adapt to local circumstances and needs. But this implies a necessarily local and therefore relatively non-powerful set of collectives existing in a patchwork fashion across a geographic area. Such collectives would be vulnerable to large national and multinational corporations and interests which can wield vast amounts of power with little accountability. Therefore, in order to protect anarchic collective life, there must be a strong national executive which holds power apart from economic interests, whose sole reason for being is to protect the autonomy and safety of local communities. 

An excellent candidate for such an executive, free from market pressure, would be a monarch “for the people, by the people” who exercises the role of protector of the people. Such a monarch, working in concert with elected bodies from the various communities, and holding a set of checks and balances on each other, could maximize the autonomy of those communities. Such a monarch would officially “own” all land and resources as God’s chief steward of creation. But the monarch would delegate stewardship and management of these resources to local communities. No one would permanently own any resource, but would be seen as managers on behalf of the crown, who is a manager on behalf of God. 

If the managers broke the social contract and did what was not in the best interest of the people, the crown could take back the resource. If the crown broke the social contract and did not protect the people, the crown would be deposed and replaced with a new monarch selected by the representative bodies. Thus, the crown would "own" all resources, but would not be able to use these resources without adhering to the laws consented by the people and upheld by the judiciary. Likewise, the people would have the right to freely use resources, under the regulations and protections of the crown. But if the judiciary finds that they violate the laws of the land, the crown has power to rescind usage rights, and redistribute the property to those who will manage it lawfully.

Theocratic Pluralist: In order to sustain genuine pluralism and diversity, there must be a Supreme Value and social reverence for pluralism and diversity from the highest level of society. This is because without clear foundations and boundaries for tolerance, a tolerant open society will inevitably fall into the "paradox of tolerance", and wind up tolerating ideas and groups which hate and oppress others. Therefore, there must be some Supreme Value for an inclusive vision of diversity, so long as diversity is not used to tolerate the oppression or harm of some groups by other groups. But if the value of tolerance is used as a cover to harm or oppress, then it is clearly ruled out of bounds by the Supreme Value of Inclusive, rather than exclusive, Diversity. 

The ideal metaphysical underpinning for such a Supreme Value for pluralism would be an Ultimate Reality which is plural and diverse, yet united and embracing. Thus the Trinity, in which God is conceived of as Love, would be an ideal metaphysical foundation for radical pluralism, and a State Religion devoted to the Trinity would uphold a pluralist order in which all forms of religion and human expression are valued as reflections of the Triune Life. Thus a Theocracy in which the State Church was officially committed to a progressive and inclusive Trinitarianism would function as the ideological underpinning to allow countless other forms of religion and spirituality in society, as long as those forms also supported the Supreme Value of including diverse forms of human culture, and protecting those who were vulnerable from more powerful interests. People could believe and practice whatever they wanted, so long as that belief and practice did not harm or oppress others, nor encourage their oppression or harm. 

In this way, Society would be filled with countless inclusive forms of culture, religion, and spirituality. Thus the official religion of the crown would be progressive Trinitarianism, and the crown would rule in allegiance with the values of pluralism, diversity, and inclusion which are implied by a Trinitarian Ultimate Reality. So long as the crown was a Defender of this Faith, and acted in a way to protect and nurture all forms of human culture, it would be a legitimate monarchy. But if the crown falls into persecution or oppression of vulnerable cultural groups, the crown would then lose legitimacy as a representative of the God of Love and ruler of the people, and be deposed and replaced. 

Entrepreneurial Socialism: The economic goal of society would be creativity: To maximize human capacity to express our potential and talents in ways which bring personal and communal fulfillment. This is the essence of entrepreneurship. A truly "good" society maximizes the human capacity for self-direction, either in individual activity or in freely chosen collective activity. Furthermore, a "good" economic system does not enslave human potential to the ball and chain of endless profitability or market demands, because  these are notoriously inefficient at producing full human flourishing. 

As study after study notes, unfettered Global Capitalism is only efficient at extracting wealth from the many to put into the coffers of the few, while creating oligopolies and monopolies that destroy competition, creativity, and entrepreneurship among common people. Furthermore, human creativity should be unshackled from the bonds of "popularity", because popularity often rewards the least creative products. Popular goods can often be low quality and low value (cf. junk food, pulp fiction, etc.) while high quality and high value goods can be very unpopular (cf. symphonies, ballet, or medical treatments for rare diseases). Thus, a "good" economic system will meet basic human needs while also freeing human creativity from the constraints of profit and popularity. Furthermore, humans are incapable of authentic self-direction if they lack the safety or food or health or education or opportunity to do so. 

Therefore, in order to maximize entrepreneurship a society must provide equality of opportunity, and a basic foundation of health and safety for all to build on top of. This in turn requires a robust socialist commitment to making sure everyone has access to the “daily bread” they need to survive and thrive. If people are provided with these basic resources, including healthy food, basic healthcare, and quality education, most people will use these resources to maximize their human potential and pursue maximally fulfilling lives. Thus, the key measure for economic health of society is the health and wellbeing of it citizens. Wealth and resources exist to serve humans. Humans do not exist to serve wealth and resources. 

The re-introduction of a monarch and a state religion in a culture which rejected them over 200 years ago may seem to be radical and shocking. But two centuries is a rather short time compared with how long some cultures have endured, and an even shorter time compared with biological evolution and geological time. And the system we are currently under contains internal contradictions and deficiencies which cause cultural instability, lack of access to opportunity, and ecological degradation, which will render our culture unsustainable. In order for us to create a sense of stability and stewardship which will allow us to continue the great American Experiment of Democracy, freedom, and justice for all, we could incorporate elements which have historically led to long term social sustainability in other cultures. Some of the greatest systemic threats to our sustainability include the following: 

1. SHORT TERM VIEWPOINTS. Our current executive branch favors short-sighted leadership which only focuses on four year increments, rather than long term vision for decades and centuries. And one goal of a good society is for the current generation to “plant trees that that their grandchildren will sit under the shade of”, rather than optimizing for quick and shallow prosperity. A monarch who is accountable to democratic processes provides a systemic role for long term vision in what can be a very short-sighted democratic process. Additionally, long term issues like climate change need long term viewpoints to effectively develop long term solutions. And short term election cycles incentivize short term viewpoints to deal reactively to short term crises, rather than proactively dealing with long term trends. 

Furthermore, if we look at the quality of leadership exercised by American Presidents who were elected democratically, and compare it to the quality of leadership in constitutional monarchies, we will find that our democratic process does not seem to choose leaders who are more skilled than the average monarch. Voting simply does not ensure skilled or competent executive leadership (whereas someone trained from childhood to take the executive role might). In fact, our Presidents are often less skilled because their leadership is hamstrung by the necessarily short time frame they are elected within. As soon as they are elected, they either must direct attention to fund raising and re-election, or they are relegated to "lame duck" status. A monarch, exercising authority under a system of checks and balances with the judiciary and elected representatives, would possess all the benefits of an elected executive branch with none of the drawbacks. 

2. DOMINATION BY MONIED INTERESTS. All levels of government, including the representative and the executive, are overly influenced by monied interests, and the lure of power. All levels of government are beholden to Corporate money to wage successful campaigns to get into office, and then to maintain their role in office. As soon as they win one election they must immediately direct attention to fundraising for the next election, rather than focusing on the needs of their people. And the election of executive leaders exacerbates all of these trends to the highest imaginable degree. By making the monarch the official owner of all potential power, in the form of all material resources, it takes away the profit motive from the crown. Since the crown owns all potential power, it does not stand to gain from bribes or "donations", and can effectively check monied interests with its long term role as protector of the people and chief steward of God's resources.

3. DIVERSITY NEEDS INSTITUTIONAL GROUNDING. As it stands, our cultural insistence on diversity and toleration has no central institution, nor core metaphysical foundation, to appeal to. Without institutional or metaphysical grounding, such values eat themselves, in actions such as the toleration of groups dedicated to non-toleration, and the embrace and inclusion of those dedicated to hate. This creates inevitable contradictions, as bad actors demand toleration for divisive and dehumanizing ideologies such as Neo-Fascism, while other bad actors use “cancel culture” to silence and shame and censure disagreement in the name of "Diversity and Inclusion". What is required then is an official institution and a metaphysics dedicated to diversity, tolerance, and inclusion, which also has clear boundaries and ethical norms for excluding hatred and demonization. A State Church, dedicated to a God of Love, who is revealed in the life of an Oppressed Savior who calls us to protect the vulnerable and liberate the oppressed, is an ideal institutional and metaphysical basis for a sustainable vision of real Diversity and Inclusion.

4. CORE VALUES: In this thought experiment, I am trying to balance certain values, and also privilege other values, without denying that most values have some place in a functioning society. Thus, I would like to label the values I am seeking to balance with a =, and label which values I'm seeking to privilege with >.

• Individual = Collective
• Free Market = Social Control
• Monarchy = Democracy
• Freedom = Protection
• Persons > Profits
• The Vulnerable > The Powerful 
• Communities > Corporations
• Daily Bread > Dow Jones
• Local > Global
• Regional > National
• Life > Convenience
• Peace > War
• Entrepreneurs > Oligopolies 
• Labor > Management
• Healthcare for all > Healthcare for profit
• Education > Incarceration
• Redemption > Retribution
• Inclusion > Exclusion
• Cooperation > Competition
• Sustainability > Success

AN OUTLINE FOR THE CROWN CORPORATE STATE

A hypothetical outline for a governmental system, which might be called Monarchic Anarchist Theocratic Pluralist Entrepreneurial Socialism.

Preamble: A New Synthesis for a New Era

This document is a thought experiment to articulate a coherent ideology that could hold a Crown Corporate State together, drawing sympathetically from diverse traditions: the Libertarian emphasis on entrepreneurship, the best of Capitalism and its ability to drive innovation and prosperity, the Marxist critique of unrestrained Capitalism, the Distributism of C.S. Lewis, the radical localism of the Catholic Worker movement, and the stability of constitutional monarchies.

The basic metaphor for this society is that of a sport. Economic and cultural life is the dynamic competition between teams on a playing field. For this competition to be free, fair, and creative, two conditions must be met. First, the playing field—representing the collectively owned resources of society—must be level and well-maintained. Second, the game must be governed by impartial referees—the government—who enforce rules that protect all players and ensure the integrity of the game itself. The government’s role is not to control the teams, but to guarantee the conditions for a good game.

Article I. Core Principles of Governance

This state is founded on the following integrated principles which recognize each and every person as a child of God, worthy of dignity and respect, both as individuals and as collectives. Thus, the principles of governance are designed to contribute to the full flourishing and thriving of every person and community, as they use their freedoms to steward their own persons and resources, while ensuring no one is treated unjustly or inhumanely for the benefit of others. To this end this system is based on:

• Monarchic Anarchism: To protect the genuine freedom and self-governance of local communities from overpowering corporate and national interests, a strong national executive is required. This executive, a Monarch, stands apart from market pressures, with the sole purpose of protecting the autonomy and safety of the people. This creates a synergy where a powerful center enables radical local freedom.
• Theocratic Pluralism: To sustain genuine diversity, society requires a Supreme Value and institutional reverence for pluralism. A state founded on an inclusive, Trinitarian understanding of Ultimate Reality as diverse, unified, and loving provides the metaphysical and institutional grounding to protect all forms of human expression, so long as they do not harm or oppress others. A theocracy of love becomes the ultimate guarantor of pluralism.
• Entrepreneurial Socialism: To maximize human creativity and potential (entrepreneurship), society must first provide for fundamental human needs. A robust social safety net providing healthcare, education, and basic security (socialism) is not the enemy of enterprise, but its necessary foundation. It unshackles human potential from the sole demands of profit and survival, allowing for true innovation and fulfillment.

Article II. The Crown: The Executive as Permanent Steward

This model stands in direct contrast to systems with short-term executives. To combat the short-sighted viewpoints inherent in four-year increments, the executive power is vested in a life-term Monarch. This provides a systemic role for long-term vision, allowing the current generation to "plant trees that their grandchildren will sit under the shade of." Where elected executives are immediately hamstrung by fundraising for re-election or by "lame duck" status, the Monarch is freed to focus on the long-term health of the nation.

Structure & Role: The Monarch is the legal embodiment of the nation, serving as the Corporation Sole of the state. They are Head of State and Government, chosen in a popular election to serve for life. As God's chief steward, the Monarch officially "owns" all land and resources, holding them in trust for the people. Their purpose is not personal enrichment but long-term stewardship and the protection of the people's autonomy from domination by monied interests.

Powers:

• Executes the laws passed by Parliament.
• Serves as Commander-in-Chief.
• Appoints one-third of the members of all judicial tribunals.
• Issues, renews, and terminates "Writs of Stewardship" for all real property.

Accountability (Dismissal): Should the Crown break the social contract, it loses its legitimacy. A Monarch can be dismissed for malfeasance or incapacity through a process initiated by a supermajority vote in Parliament and adjudicated by the Supreme Tribunal. Succession is non-hereditary.

Succession of the Crown: Upon the death or dismissal of a Monarch, a constitutional process ensures a stable transition.

• The Interregnum: The period between Monarchs is overseen by a "Standing Council of the Realm," composed of the Speaker of the House of Labor, the Lord Speaker of the House of Lords, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Tribunal.
• Election: The Standing Council serves as the temporary Ecclesiastical Authority, managing the day-to-day functions of the state while they oversee a new popular election to fill the vacant office of the Monarch.

Article III. The Parliament: A Bicameral Legislature of Estates

Legislative power is held by a bicameral Parliament where representation is based on economic function, ensuring that both Labor and Capital have a direct voice in governance.

• The House of Labor: Composed of representatives elected solely by citizens whose primary income is derived from wages or salaries. These may include business owners, so long as they are the only employee of that business, and their business does not make a majority of its income from capital investment. 
• The House of Lords: Composed of representatives elected solely by citizens who own businesses which employ at least one laborer, or who are the Corporate Sole of a corporation, or otherwise derive their primary income from capital investment and the employment of others.
• The Legislative Process: Both houses possess equal authority and may originate legislation on any subject. For a bill to become law, it must be debated, amended, and passed by a majority in both houses. Once approved by both, it is sent to the Monarch for Royal Assent. This ensures that no law can be passed without the consent of representatives from both the laboring and owning classes of society.

Article IV. The Tribunals: A Judiciary of Tripartite Balance

The judicial power is exercised by a hierarchy of tribunals designed to be independent of any single faction.

• Structure: Each tribunal, from the local to the Supreme level, is a three-judge panel.
• Appointment: For every panel, one judge is appointed by the Crown, one by the House of Labor, and one by the House of Lords.
• Jurisdiction: The tribunals interpret the laws and the Constitution, acting as the impartial "referees" of society. Their primary function is to resolve disputes by applying "neutral principles of law," ensuring that all branches of government and all corporate entities adhere to the nation's established rules and procedures. 
• Distributed Tribunals: From the national to local levels, the judicial needs of the state and her citizens shall be provided by tribunals appointed at levels appropriate to their jurisdictions.
• Legal Rights: All parties in court have a right to an attorney. If a litigant is unable to obtain an attorney, one will be provided by the Crown. All litigants have the right to a speedy and just trial, and freedom from self-incrimination. There are no juries, as the tripartite appointment of judges is held to provide a faster, more expert, and ideologically balanced mechanism for justice than a panel of laypersons. Yet, while there are no juries, there is a right to appeal the verdict to a higher court.

Article V. Federalism, Spheres, and Local Governance

The national structure is mirrored at the state level, with delegated authority for local organization.

• Checks and Balances: This system is inherently designed to have separate spheres of responsibly and activity, with checks and balances on each sphere. This system of mutual accountability and interdependence operates across the functions of the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary, operating at national, state, and local levels, while taking into account the interests of the state, the laboring class, and the owning class. 
• State Monarchies: Each state is headed by a Sub-Monarch, who is elected for life by the citizens of that state and acts as the Corporation Sole for that state. State governments replicate the national tripartite structure of Crown, Labor, and Lords.
• Local Autonomy: Within states, local municipalities, communes, professional guilds, and other associations may be organized in various ways, with one critical requirement: each must have a designated and legally registered "Sole" who is accountable for that entity.

Article VI. The Mandate of the Sole: A Rejection of the Aggregate

A core structural flaw in modern economies is the diffusion of responsibility within the Corporation Aggregate. In this common model, a company or organization is governed by a board or committee. When malfeasance occurs, accountability is spread so thin that it often vanishes entirely. No single person is ultimately responsible; the buck stops nowhere. This allows for vast corporate crimes to be committed with little to no personal consequence for the leaders. This state explicitly rejects this model of the Corporate Aggregate in favor of the model of the Corporate Sole.

• The Universal Corporation Sole: All organizations—businesses, guilds, non-profits, and communes—must be legally structured as a Corporation Sole. Thus the structure of the Corporate Sole is exercised across society, from the public to the private sphere, from the government to business to religion to all other forms of collective organization. The Corporation Aggregate is legally prohibited. Every civil and business organization—from a multinational corporation to a local bakery, non-profit, or guild—must be structured as a Corporation Sole.
• The Theory of the Corporate Sole: A Corporation Sole is a unique legal entity where a single office, rather than a group of people, is recognized in law as a corporation, with the individual officeholder acting as its agent. This structure concentrates all legal authority and, crucially, all accountability into the person holding that office (the "Sole"). In government, this model can create a powerful executive whose authority transfers seamlessly with the office, ensuring continuity and making the leader unambiguously responsible for the state's actions. For business, it's a radical departure from the typical board-led Corporation Aggregate, as it eliminates diffuse responsibility by making a CEO or owner personally liable for corporate debts and misdeeds. Similarly, in social organizations like churches or guilds, it provides clear leadership and ensures the head figure is directly answerable for the group's financial and ethical conduct, forcing the buck to stop with a specific, identifiable person.
• Radical Accountability: This structure legally vests the organization in the office of its single leader (its "Sole"). This individual is held personally and legally accountable for the actions, debts, and liabilities of the organization. They cannot hide behind a board vote or plausible deniability. This principle ensures that there is always a specific human person answerable to the law and to the community for the deeds of any organized body.
• Succession of the Sole: Upon the death or dismissal of a Sole, a constitutional process modeled on the succession of the Monarch will ensure a stable transition for all Corporate entities. The specific mechanism for succession within a private entity (e.g., appointment, election by members, inheritance) must be clearly defined in its registered charter and approved by the Crown as being orderly and just.

Article VII. Subsidiarity and the State

Subsidiarity is an organizing principle asserting that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest, or least centralized competent authority. This means higher levels of government or social organization should only perform those functions which cannot be handled effectively at a more immediate or local level.

• Default to Local Authority: The entire system is built on the "Monarchic Anarchist" principle, which is subsidiarity in practice. It presumes that all social, economic, and political matters should be handled by the smallest, most local competent authority possible. Higher levels of government exist primarily to support and defend this local autonomy.
• Empowerment of Local "Soles": Local communities—municipalities, guilds, communes—are the primary problem-solvers. Through their accountable "Sole," they manage local infrastructure, schools, markets, and social welfare. The national and state governments do not run local affairs; they ensure local communities have the freedom and resources to run themselves.
• Tiered Intervention: Higher authorities intervene only when a matter clearly exceeds the capacity of a lower one. For example, a local guild manages its own affairs. The State Sub-Monarch would only step in to mediate a dispute between two guilds or to handle a regional infrastructure project that connects them.
• The Crown as Protector, Not Director: The Monarch’s role is the ultimate expression of subsidiarity. They do not dictate local policy. Instead, the Crown's power is used to protect the local communities from being overpowered by larger economic forces (like monopolies) or by overreaching state governments. The Monarch's job is to ensure the "playing field" is level for even the smallest "teams."
• Resource Stewardship: The system of "Writs of Stewardship" for land and resources is a key tool. Instead of central planning, the Crown delegates the direct management and stewardship of resources to the local communities and individuals who live and work with them, trusting them to be the most competent managers.

Article VIII. The Economy: Entrepreneurial Socialism in Practice

Unfettered global capitalism is only efficient at extracting wealth for the few, creating oligopolies that destroy the competition and creativity of common people. A good economic system must unshackle human potential from the bonds of both poverty and popularity, as popularity often rewards low-value goods (like junk food) while high-value goods (like medical treatments for rare diseases) may be unpopular.

• The Foundation (Socialism): The state guarantees universal access to the "daily bread" necessary for a flourishing life. This includes basic healthcare, education, housing, and nutrition. These are not commodities for sale but fundamental rights provided to all.
• The Goal (Entrepreneurship): With their basic needs met, citizens are free to pursue their talents. This fosters a culture of true entrepreneurship—individual or collective—driven by creativity, not just market demand.
• Crown Ownership of Land: All real estate within the nation is legally owned by the Crown in its capacity as the national Corporation Sole.
• Writs of Stewardship: Individuals, families, and organizations do not own land. Instead, they purchase a "Writ of Stewardship" from the Crown. This writ grants them exclusive rights to use, improve, and profit from a property for a specified long-term period (e.g., 99 years). These writs can be sold, transferred, or inherited, but are always subject to renewal and can be terminated by the Crown for gross misuse or national necessity (with just compensation).
• Legal Accountability: This Sole is held personally and legally accountable for the actions, debts, and liabilities of the organization. This eliminates the diffusion of responsibility found in corporate boards and holds a specific person responsible for the entity's conduct.
• Judicial Transfer of Stewardship: "Writs of Stewardship" are transferable leases are granted by the Crown, and may be sold from one steward to another with the Crown's permission. If a steward is found by the judiciary to be acting against the law, the Crown has the power to rescind the writ and redistribute the resource.
• The Crown Trust and Mandatory Stewardship: While the Crown owns all real estate, it may not allow property to go fallow. It must be used for the public good and distributed appropriately to stewards for various purposes associated with the common good. Individuals, including the Crown, may use and steward personal resources as befits their vocations, but they may not hoard more than they need for unproductive or non-beneficial purposes. The Parliament shall be responsible for creating legislation that defines unproductive hoarding and establishes clear, progressive tax structures or other mechanisms to discourage it, ensuring resources are used for personal and communal flourishing. The Crown, in concert with the Parliament and Judiciary, may designate certain properties for conservation for the common good (i.e. National Parks, Monuments, Historical sites, etc.).

Article IX. The State and Pluralism: The Theocracy of Inclusion

To provide an institutional and metaphysical grounding for diversity, the state addresses the "paradox of tolerance" head-on. Without clear foundations, a tolerant society can be consumed by its tolerance for the intolerant. It can fall into contradictions, platforming divisive ideologies like neo-fascism in the name of free speech, while others use "cancel culture" to silence legitimate disagreement in the name of inclusion.

• The State Faith: The official religion of the Crown is a faith dedicated to a God of Love, revealed as a Trinity of perfect diversity in unity. The core tenet of this state faith is that an infinite God is reflected in infinite forms of human culture and spirituality.
• The Monarch as Defender of the Faith: The Monarch's primary religious duty is to act as "Defender of the Faith," defined as protecting all forms of human culture, so long as they do not cause harm or seek to oppress others.
• Radical Pluralism: This "theocracy" functions as the institutional guarantor of pluralism. It provides a clear framework for toleration while establishing firm boundaries against ideologies of hate. People are free to believe and practice as they wish, provided their practice does not violate the supreme value of inclusive, non-harmful diversity.

Article X. A Charter of Core Values

All actions of the government, its agents, and its judiciary shall be interpreted and guided by the following principles, which form the ethical constitution of the state.

• The Health of Citizens is the Wealth of the Commonweath: Ensuring everyone has their "daily bread" is a greater measure of economic health than the fluctuations of the Dow Jones or other market indicators.
• The rights of the individual will be balanced with the health of the collective.
• The dynamism of the free market will be balanced by the necessity of social control and regulation.
• The stability of the Monarchy will be balanced with the accountability of democracy.
• The essential freedom of the people will be balanced with the state’s duty to provide protection.
• The well-being, dignity, and flourishing of human persons shall always be prioritized over the generation of profit.
• The law and the state shall actively protect the vulnerable, ensuring that the powerful are held to the highest standard of accountability.
• Thriving communities are the bedrock of society and will be supported over the abstract interests of corporations.
• Local and regional autonomy will be privileged over global and national centralization wherever feasible.
• The sanctity of human life and the health of the ecosystem will take precedence over mere economic convenience.
• A state of peace is the default and desired condition; war is a catastrophic last resort, and only pursued for defensive purposes.
• The economic system will foster creative entrepreneurs and actively dismantle the power of entrenched oligopolies.
• The rights, dignity, and fair compensation of labor shall be held in higher regard than the prerogatives of management.
• Healthcare is a human right for all, not a commodity for profit.
• Investment in universal education is recognized as more valuable than expenditures on incarceration.
• The justice system will be oriented toward redemption and restoration rather than purely retributive punishment.
• Social and cultural inclusion will be actively fostered over practices of exclusion.
• Systems that encourage cooperation will be favored over those that mandate zero-sum competition.
• Long-term sustainability is a more critical goal than short-term success.

Would any of this actually work? Perhaps only in the mind of a gifted science fiction writer. This is, after all, merely a thought experiment by someone who has read too many novels set in the future. But then again, perhaps as we move into a post-scarcity society, in which much of our labor is done by artificial intelligence, and monetary value is largely a technological construct, and we live on multiple planets, we will definitely evolve new ways of organizing society that will look very different from the systems we have used in the past. Perhaps the way to the future will involve re-visioning the systems of the past.