On one of the Facebook pages (Christ in Civil Government, or something like that), a certain prominent disciple of Rushdoony complained that if more people were outraged by our government’s violating the constitution as they were about Phil Robertson’s getting fired, our country would be a lot better. I disagree; in the long run Phil Robertson will reach infinitely more people than “yet another argument for the Constitution.” It’s really quite simple: nobody gives a damn about abstract, intellectual arguments. The average man on the street, Christian or not, simply cannot understand (and quite frankly, doesn’t care about) the intricate details of political theory. They do understand concrete details, though. They can identify with an authentic, simple person who says what he means and likely represents the majority of Americans.
Ultimately, this is the same argument for something like monarchy. This is why monarchy is so appealing. “Value-talk” is abstract. Only a few people can follow it. Is it important? Sure, but don’t inflate its importance. (This is why apologetics is subject to the law of diminishing returns.) What monarchy at its best moment points to is the embodiment in a concrete entity of the nation’s culture. Maybe most people can’t articulate it like that, but there you have it.