This is beautiful: Corporatism, even (and perhaps especially) monarchic corporatism, better represents the common interests than parliamentary democracy. https://twitter.com/sancrucensis/status/1253036164308701185

Re: corporatism, everybody should read Vermeule's piece on "The Administrative State: Law, Democracy, and Knowledge." Therein, he shows that an unelected bureaucracy could actually serve *democratic* interests better than an elected legislature. https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=647007085116109027127072096119083065023042068077035054121102028076069064069083108113021020036120013043047127116115019011084091008086087008079081127101086085005100095052003024125001025010123022117088127004001120084000097084067025030097008028084096113&EXT=pdf

Administrative agencies already make up a huge percentage of government in America, and they employ a *much* wider and more populous demographic than the other major "representative" branch of government: the legislature. Administrative agencies, moreover, have the advantage...

... of having a whole lot of "feet on the ground", since they are deeply and concretely involved in administrating the affairs of the nation, e.g. economic and environmental affairs. Consequently, agencies are possessed of better and more comprehensive representative power...

...than Congress itself, which pretends to represent the people by engaging in bitter partisanship and fighting for the majority view. Administrative representation, by contrast, is far closer to the kind of representation imagined by the corporatist ideal: actual interests...

...of the actual, and highly diverse, groups of people are brought to bear directly upon the administrative processes of decision-making, through the consolidation in each administrative agency of various levels of expertise and concrete familiarity with the matters...

...being administrated, at both national and local levels. A much more efficient system - and much more "representative" and "democratic" - by virtue of being both more centralized and decentralized at the same time.

I'll add that this is one reason why, contrary to so many angry opponents of integralism and the administrative state, the administrate state might actually be better for reasons of *subsidiarity* than what a few liberals in powdered wigs cobbled up in the name of democracy.

If the administrative state relies upon more intimate expertise and familiarity with the actual needs of people on the ground, and thus its agencies acts in proportion to those needs, it can serve those subsidiary groups much better than a few elitists senators in Washington.