The Prince and the Pauper
Just recorded an Uncommon Knowledge interview with--and I'm not making this up--His Serene Highness Prince Hans Adam II, Reigning Prince of Liechtenstein. The interview won't go up on the Internet for another ten days, but, in the meantime, a few impressions:
- Discussing his book, The State in the Third Millennium, I opened with this quotation:
The United States and Europe “have to free the state from all the unnecessary tasks and burdens with which it has been loaded during the last hundred years, which have distracted it from its two main tasks: maintenance of the rule of law and foreign policy.”
Every word of that, I said, could have been written by Sarah Palin. The prince laughed, then remarked that he'd be quite happy as a member of the the Tea Party. And he meant it. Over and over again--particularly in addressing the need to roll back the welfare state--the prince sounded just like Sarah Palin or Rand Paul.
- When we Americans talk about taking the long view, we ordinarily mean thinking in terms of a decade or two. The prince? I asked about the pressures Germany has been placing on Liechtenstein to change its banking regulations. The prince began his answer by saying, "We've had problems with the Germans ever since the Holy Roman Empire."
- I'd forgotten how refreshing it is to talk with a European who appreciates the United States instead of resenting it. Hans Adam noted that American soldiers had liberated his wife's family from a concentration camp, adding that he considers it essential for the United States to remain the world's superpower.
A fascinating mind--and a funny, warm, completely enjoyable man. Thomas Jefferson would have disapproved, but I couldn't help thinking that if George III had been more like Hans Adam II, things might have gone very differently.
- Comment (18)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
I don't understand the Thomas Jefferson allusion.
Jul '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
The being King/a royalist part, not the subsidiarity part.
May '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
His Serene Highness' brother, Prince Niklaus, was a generous benefactor of the academy in Liechtenstein where I studied philosophy. He (i.e. Niklaus) used to come to our events sometimes. Being American to the bone, I always found it difficult to sound serious and natural saying, "Your Serene Highness." But he was unfailingly gracious.
I loved being able to tell friends that I had a bank account in Liechtenstein. Also driving past that fabulous castle every day or hiking the alpine slopes above it. My first baby was born in Vaduz.
Did you ask him about Solzhenitsyn?
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
Jefferson didn't merely consider the policies of George III mistaken. He opposed monarchy in principle--and was willing to pay a price (and to see others pay a price) for toppling it. Jefferson on the French Revolution, writing in 1793:
Which was, I'm sorry to say, about the same attitude that Soviet sympathizers took toward the Russian Revolution throughout the 20th century. Not Jefferson at his most inspiring--although, to be fair, he was writing before he could have known the extent of the Terror.
Jul '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
Now Ricochet has ten days to think up all the great questions Peter could have asked the Prince and post them here. Perhaps a prize for the one Peter most wishes he asked?
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
katievs:
Did you ask him about Solzhenitsyn? · Nov 9 at 1:52pm
Nope. Should I have?
Does your child have Liechtensteiner citizenship, btw?
Jul '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
Peter Robinson
Jefferson didn't merely consider the policies of George III mistaken. He opposed monarchy in principle--and was willing to pay a price (and to see others pay a price) for toppling it. Jefferson on the French Revolution, writing in 1793:
Which was, I'm sorry to say, about the same attitude that Soviet sympathizers took toward the Russian Revolution throughout the 20th century. Not Jefferson at his most inspiring--although, to be fair, he was writing before he could have known the extent of the Terror.
Much thanks Peter. The great ones always seem to have a weakness, and conversely some of the weak ones are seen as great.
May '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
Peter, I worry you've been seduced by a charmer who whispered all the right things into your ear.
Yes, he's brilliant, free-market oriented, and U.S.-loving, and, yes, his citizens, through their representatives, are technically free to "de-throne" him (and yet they submit, willingly, which in itself is kinda creepy). But he's still a monarch--in the traditional sense, with real and inherited power--who sits on a $2 billion personal fortune.
The Tea Party would not approve.
Sep '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
I can't speak for all those that describe themselves as members of the Tea Party, but I think it's fair to say that much of the animus of Tea Party members comes from their love of their country, the United States of America, and its founding principles and ideals, and a desire to see them preserved and reinvigorated. The United States was obviously founded as a constitutional republic, out of the ashes of the royal system that preceded it; thus, of course there will be pride it what it is, and how it overcame the might of Britian. However, this love and pride is not the same thing as saying that all monarchy is inherantly bad. Loving our own individual circumstances is not the same as hating all others universally.
Like I said, I don't claim to speak for all Tea Partiers--certainly some tow the more radical Jeffersonian view quoted above. However, I think that view goes too far: Aristotle got it right when he argued that each circumstance produces a different optimal regime. Republic for the USA, and maybe monarchy for Liechtenstein.
May '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
Peter Robinson
katievs:
Did you ask him about Solzhenitsyn? · Nov 9 at 1:52pm
Nope. Should I have?
Does your child have Liechtensteiner citizenship, btw? · Nov 9 at 3:47pm
Liechtensteiners guard the privilege of their citizenship very jealously. I suppose they must or they will soon be overrun. I think both parents have to be citizens for a baby born there to have a claim. Something like that. Anyway, we didn't qualify.
The Solzenhitsyn connection is a lovely one--right up your alley. Here's how I've heard it told. (I'm afraid I will botch the details.) After WW II, the allies agreed at Yalta to return all Russian soldiers within their territories to the motherland (and virtually certain execution as enemy spies). A number of Russian soldiers were taking refuge in Liechtenstein. When the Russian general demanded that they be handed over, his Liechtenstein counterpart refused. "I represent a free land, and those men will stay here if they so choose."
Decades later when Solzhenitsyn was able to travel to the west, he went first (quietly and unannounced) to Liechtenstein to thank the Prince for that heroic stand--unique in the west.
May '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
This is from Wikipedia:
Despite his criticism of the "weakness" of the West, Solzhenitsyn always made clear that he admired the political liberty which was one of the enduring strengths of western democratic societies. In a major speech delivered to the International Academy of Philosophy in Liechtenstein on 14 September 1993, Solzhenitsyn implored the West not to "lose sight of its own values, its historically unique stability of civic life under the rule of law—a hard-won stability which grants independence and space to every private citizen."[32]
My husband and I were there for that speech. A great, great privilege.
It was a nearly overpowering experience of gigantic moral authority. Everyone felt it. The hall hushed with a kind of self-subduing awe when he walked in. The Berlin wall had only fallen a few years earlier.
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
Scott Reusser: Peter, I worry you've been seduced by a charmer who whispered all the right things into your ear.
Yes, he's brilliant, free-market oriented, and U.S.-loving, and, yes, his citizens, through their representatives, are technically free to "de-throne" him (and yet they submit, willingly, which in itself is kinda creepy). But he's still a monarch--in the traditional sense, with real and inherited power--who sits on a $2 billion personal fortune.
The Tea Party would not approve. · Nov 9 at 4:20pm
I'll admit, Scott, that I'm a sucker for charm. But when you see the interview, pay particular attention to the third segment, in which Hans Adam describes the initiative process in Liechtenstein. It ain't that hard to get a law overturned, whether the prince likes the idea or not.Watch the interview, if you would, then let me know if I was too soft on him.
The famly's personal fortune isn't anything like $2 billion, according to Forbes, btw. It's $5 billion.
Edited on Nov 9, 2010 at 6:56pmRe: The Prince and the Pauper
Can't thank you enough, Katievs, for that account of Solzhenitsyn. I was completely unaware of any of that.
And you're right. Becoming a citizen of Liechtenstein ain't easy. After the shoot, I asked Hans Adam if the country could use an interviewer. He just laughed.
May '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
I'm probably just jealous of the guy, Peter.
Sep '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
Ricochet - "Where even the water cooler talk has a history degree."
May '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
BTW, Peter: I sent a link to your Uncommon Knowledge interview with Gary Becker today to that same Liechtenstein-born daughter, now 20 and a senior majoring in economics. She liked it a lot, though finds the idea that the banks didn't realize they were exposing themselves to such risk rather hard to credit. I'll have to tell her about the one upcoming.
May '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
Seems Peter has been schmoozed by the aristocracy.
Peter should expect a Knight's Cross of the Order of Merit of the Principality of Liechtenstein at the next honours list. Not sure you are permitted to be called Sir Peter.
At this rate Ricochet will end up with the Mark Steyn's disease of talking about tea with Duke of Kent at Claridges last week..
Sep '10
Re: The Prince and the Pauper
I have not yet read it but I've taken a look at Hoover fellow Kurt Leube's review of the Prince's book. It seems that tiny Liechtenstein's monarch is a far greater believer in freedom and self-determination than all of the European Union's self-proclaimed liberal democrats put together. Indeed Hans Adam's vision of decentralization, direct democracy and free markets runs contrary to everything the European constitution enables: The elimination of state's rights, apparatchik rule, and regulation of the curvature of bananas. Though I'm certainly no monarchist, instead of thousands of EU directives I'd rather have a few more Liechtensteins making up what Europe is today.