The wedding of Crown Princess Victoria and ,now, Prince Daniel is also a blow against those who wish to see a parting from the traditions in Scandinavia of having royal households.
In many circles it is considered modern to persieve monarchy as an anachronism, a relic of the past, out of date in our modern society.
It is easy, on paper, to see how people inheriting their titles might seem at odds with our society's focus on equality and due democratic process. It does on some level collide with the notion that national leaders and heads-of-state are supposed to be elected by the people for fixed periods of time.
In reality the picture is far more complex. And in countries like Norway, Sweden and Denmark you have to be pretty focused on principles and retoric to suggest that these countries would have been better served with a president as national leader.
To understand the position of the king one must understand some basics of political theory. Political theory defines a nation as a people who share a language and cultural heritage. A state is a political entity that does not necessarily follow those same lines. If the members of one nation band together into a state we call that a nation-state. Norway is one such nation-state.
The Basque people in northern Spain are also definable as a nation, but since they live inside the state of Spain, they do not have a state of their own.
In Norway the position of head of state and national leader are separated. The elected Prime Minister is the head of state. He leads the government in the kings name and is elected by the people through parliament. The king is the national leader. He is a leader by example, and a symbol of unity for the people of Norway, having little real power. This is a role he, and his father and grand-father, have played very well.
During trying times the role of the eurpoean kings has been even more important, rising up as examples and symbols for their peoples to rally around. The most famous and obvious example of such from Norway is King Haakon VII's defiance and continued resistance in the face of Nazi invasion and occupation.
The majority of people in Norway see an advantage in having a national leader who doesn't represent a particular political direction. Standing above the petty bickering of the political parties, the King remains a symbol of our unity, national identity and sovereignty. This has great importance for a small and still young nation like Norway.
For Norway's part, this would have been quite different if the king and his family had not been so aware of their position in society and managed their role so well. But they do that spectacularly.
When I was in the military I swore an oath: "For King, People and Fatherland". I am proud to stand by that oath.
