The modern notion that monarchy is inherently tyrannical and exploitative is an artifact of a fundamentally deficient concept of human society. That concept – the modern concept – treats society as basically loveless, a collation of antagonists engaged in a zero sum game; so it eventually finds, as we have lately seen it do, that all human relations are more or less exploitative – the wife and husband of each other, the mother and father of the child, and so forth. Such is the conclusion of the latter day apotheosis of modernist dialectical materialism in postmodernism: all human relations are about power, and nothing else.
Notice that this doctrine is self-fulfilling. If on the basis of the conviction that human relations are all essentially exploitative you then proceed to exploit your fellows, you are likely sooner or later to discover that they have all reciprocated.
Postmodern social theory boils down then to an assertion that, as composed of mutually inimical agents bound only to exploit each other as much as possible, society is essentially sociopathic. And behaving as if this were so leads to actual sociopathy.
But this is an absurd result. It is to empty the concept of society of all its society – which is to say, literally, of fellowship, of companionship, of love. It is to mistake the basic defect of society – some failure to love – as essential thereto. The reality, of course, is that you can’t obtain a failure to love in the first place, except and unless there be first a prevalence of love, from which one might then fall, or fail.
It is not enmity that is the basis of society, but love. What sane man, after all, *wants* to fight, or *wants* to injure his fellows? Do we not all rather hunger after fellowship? Would not all sane men rather benefit each other, than injure each other?
So monarchy is not inherently exploitative. It is, on the contrary, and like all human relationships, fundamentally loving, and only defectively exploitative. Society is affectionate first, or it is not society to begin with. Only derivatively can it be exploitative, abusive, evil. Hobbes was wrong: the State of Nature is not war, but friendship.
It goes deeper. Society is not just loving, it is loyal, and feudal – manifesting fealty, féodalité, fidelity, fidelitas, homage sworn by a vassal to his overlord:
… socius “companion, ally,” probably originally “follower,” from PIE *sokw-yo-, suffixed form of root *sekw- (1) “to follow,” and thus related to sequi “to follow” (see sequel). Compare Old English secg, Old Norse seggr “companion,” which seem to have been formed on the same notion).
Society is how we keep faith with each other; and since always some men are by nature or effort more virtuous than others, more noble than their brothers and friends, so féodalité gives rise naturally and organically to loyalty between lords and their followers, their companions. So far then is the royal relation from essentially exploitative, that it is almost the archetype, sign and synecdoche of the shared bread that binds men together in companies.