A monarch unites, unlike an elected president who, by definition, must always divide.

The ruling dynasty is a transcendent symbol of the unity of the state and the nation – a nation in the political, not the ethnic sense: regardless of their native language, all inhabitants have one common king. A good example of this is Belgium, which, without a unifying king, would have disintegrated long ago.

The monarch is not limited by the end of his electoral term and does not have to make concessions to his voters in order to be re-elected.

According to dynastic principles, the monarch naturally governs the country in such a way as to hand it over to his successor in the best possible condition.

In a republic, all authorities and representatives derive their legitimacy from general elections. They are thus burdened with the risks that such legitimacy can carry (favoring short-term goals at the expense of strategic ones, making decisions based on the current mood of the voters, etc.). It is therefore very useful for at least one element in the system to have another type of legitimacy, as this significantly strengthens the system of checks and balances.

In modern monarchies, the monarch is often a moral role model, a standard of behavior for his subjects.

At the same time, it is true that current monarchies are constantly "threatened", since in most countries the parliament can very quickly abolish the monarchy and declare a republic. This is also why a responsible monarch avoids anything that could threaten the monarchy and behaves more responsibly, more moderately and more respectful of rules and laws than many elected heads of state. The abdication of the Spanish King Juan Carlos de Bourbon and the handover of the throne to his successor Felipe in 2014 is a striking example.

Rulers are usually prepared for their mission from childhood; in modern monarchies, princes and princesses usually perform many duties on behalf of the monarch.

Due to early preparation, the ruler is a consummate professional who naturally masters the art of running a country down to the smallest detail.

Monarchies can unite people in joy; in modern monarchies we see that every birth of a royal child, the transfer of the throne, and other important events are celebrated with spontaneous joy by people. A republic cannot do this; people only rejoice together when the national team wins the championship, but this would also apply in a monarchy...

If the ruler is equipped with the necessary powers, he can be a controlling element over elected politicians, following the principle of Emperor Franz Joseph, who considered it his duty to protect his people from their politicians.

The monarchy is more economical and economically efficient – ​​not only are there no election costs, but no court can afford to be inadmissible wasteful (point 5).

In monarchies, as well as in Austria, tourist spending associated with the ruling family is an important source of income.

Scientific comparisons show that monarchies, by limiting internal conflicts, executive backlogs, and executive arbitrariness, provide a more favorable environment for economic success than republics.

The monarch can grant nobility rights, which in the medium term leads to improved morale and a more dignified environment; entrepreneurs, scientists, teachers, doctors, athletes, artists, etc. can advance to the nobility for merit, provided, of course, that they do not violate basic moral principles in their lives. The possibility of eventual elevation therefore in itself corrects the behavior and actions of the potential candidate.

Monarchy is poetry, republic is prose, and not even very good.