Honestly I'd have thought that the Syndicate preferred a Monarchy, albeit a weak one. With the Sultana on a throne that they could limit and control they combined having real power, with having the stability of a crowned and beloved head of state. In that sense I've always imagined Monetarists and Royalists as monarchists, just that the Monetarists thought the Syndicate (as the representatives of the moneyed class) should be a check on the Sultana's power, while the Royalist believed she should be politically unfettered from their whims and plotting.
Removal of the Monarchy is chaos, and anarchy, a situation in which the Syndicate would be unlikely to emerge intact.Â
Of course, that doesn't mean that vanity might not get the best of those with their hands on the levers of power, but not enough recognition and symbolism to satisfy their own vaingloriousness
Removal of the Monarchy is chaos, and anarchy, a situation in which the Syndicate would be unlikely to emerge intact.Â
Of course, that doesn't mean that vanity might not get the best of those with their hands on the levers of power, but not enough recognition and symbolism to satisfy their own vaingloriousness
![[Image: 21282370099_a814a08664_o.png]](https://farm1.staticflickr.com/590/21282370099_a814a08664_o.png)
