If we go republic, we’ll have a president. What’s that going to do for us? Another totally unnecessary layer of government and a huge cost, for no meaningful benefit, especially as our political system would likely put a narcissistic arsehole in the job. The royal family at least bring in large numbers of tourists and, mostly, don’t interfere with the running of the country.
Why? At the moment we've a Prime Minister, who does a bunch of stuff if the monarch says it's OK... on the understanding that if the monarch says it's not OK then we won't have a monarch much longer. In other words, the monarch is entirely decorative. Ceremonial. Pointless, if you will. Take the monarch out of the equation, without changing anything else... and everything works the same as it does now. Why introduce a presidential role into the mix?
In the interim they can be downgraded like other country's royals but in the long term, yes. Being born into roles nobody else in the country could ever attain runs contrary to democracy.
Having an elected president who is meant to be a moderator and represents the will of the people is a fairly decent system. This is what Wikipedia says about the president's powers in Portugal, which even with all it's flaws, has a pretty good system: The President, elected to a 5-year term by direct, universal suffrage, is also commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Presidential powers include appointing the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, in which the President must be guided by the assembly election results; dismissing the Prime Minister; dissolving the assembly to call early elections; vetoing legislation, which may be overridden by the assembly; and declaring a state of war or siege. It's still better than lining a monarchy's coffers with tax payers money so they can heat their palaces in the winter.
I'm betting a disneyland-style super park would generate more revenue for the UK than those inbred scone-goblins. I mean, if they want to strut around waving at folk and upsetting each other, that's fine by me. I just don't want to pay for it.
Heating enormous empty buildings whilst many millions vow not to use heating because they simply can't afford to. The royal family is such an asset to the nation.
Is that what they do? I've always disliked the voted government far more than the royals Always considered them fairly neutral but I wouldn't cry if it was to be abolished, after the Queen finally snuffs it.
One thing I will say, I feel sorry for the Queen today - she's had to meet with both Johnson and Truss today.
The most depressing thought is that the first PM she met was Winston Churchill and the last PM she met was Liz Truss.
Yup. Monarchy's are **** even when they're not a farcical waste of tax payer money. I keep getting told that it's good for tourism, but from what I gather the tourism industry around the royals is looking at buildings that they aren't in and not a meet and greet, so I don't really see how anything would change. Sod them and their associated costs off, in my opinion.
Should the Monarchy be abolished? For me, no it should not. Do I believe King Charles will do as good a job as Queen Elizabeth II did, I'm not so sure at all on that one. I believe HRH the Queen demonstrated a real sense of duty and commitment to service for our country, something that does seem to be in short supply in today's world. She gave 70 years in service to the United Kingdom. With that service came a privileged life in materialistic terms, but she gave up the freedoms we enjoy and take for granted in our every day life. I would hope our next Monarch, King Charles III demonstrates the duty and commitment his mother did as Monarch. I believe the Monarchy has its place in the United Kingdom today, it isn't just good for tourism, I believe it's also good for the following reasons: Tradition The Monarchy can serve to offer a sense of tradition. While that may not be as popular a concept today, tradition is still important. In any society tradition is important, whether it be First Nations traditions or Monarchic traditions. Tradition gives us a sense of security, can offer a unified experience and it grounds us. Tradition can often be seen as a dirty word but it's something that still serves an important function in our modern world. I know there are blots in the history of the United Kingdom that brought shame to the nation, or should bring shame. Having said that though, there is still a lot we should be allowed to celebrate and remember, collectively as a nation. I won't be made to feel embarrassed or silly for honouring the traditions of my father and my country. Stability A constitutional monarchy offers some stability within that political system. Constitutional monarchies do tend to remain centrist in terms of policy, which means that the politicians within that system are more willing to compromise as they know the Monarch will have to approve the legislation or policies they are trying to enact. This avoids radical swings to the far left or right. As a contrast, look at the United States, a federal republic. There are often lengthy debates with regards to policy and legislation, with approximately 90% of bills failing to pass the committee stage. National and cultural identity I identify as British, English and a subject of the British Monarchy. I choose this identity. Many other people around the world choose to identify as members of the Commonwealth of Nations, with the Monarch as the head. The countries that make up the Commonwealth are members on their own volition, they are free to leave the Commonwealth if they so choose. I appreciate there are many who do not want to identify as I do, which I respect, but in the same breath respect what I want. Ethics and Values HRH the Queen demonstrated values and ethics I aspire to, I want my children to aspire to and I respect. Her work ethic, commitment and sense of national duty is something many others around the world respected too. While some of the Royal Family have done little to demonstrate an abundance of these values and ethics, the Queen did. She worked tirelessly for 70 years as our Monarch, being an ambassador for our nation, without once complaining or giving up. I'm not so sure I could have lived her life and showed the dedication and commitment she did. I think 6 months in and I've have given up. Monetary Value We all know the British Royal family creates tourism in the UK, which generates income. In addition to this, The Royals acting as ambassadors for the United Kingdom helps bring in trade. I'm not going to bleat on about this as we all know the pros and cons monetarily but it is an important consideration if we are to debate whether the Monarchy should be abolished or not. I know there are arguments against all of the above, I appreciate there are strong opinions to be had in this discussion. I've given my reasons for answering no to the question set in this thread. I respect others opinions, but the crass and spiteful jokes and comments I saw online yesterday regards the passing of the Queen was crossing the line. Whether you want the Monarchy to continue or not, making jokes or spiteful comments about someone who has just died, regardless of who they are, shows you to be a seriously spineless and cretinous mofo, in my humble opinion. Let the dead rest and let the mourning mourn ffs! At least until the dead are buried and remembered and mourned by those who want to do so.
Stop whinging about the state things and practice what you preach instead of ******** about people showing no respect while being abusive and showing no respect.
Opinions are fine, making jokes about the dead within hours of them dying aren't opinions. I don't respect that nor do I pretend to!
Yes, IMHO now that Liz has gone that certain class she brought to the institution / company will never be seen again so it should be folded up. If it is to remain, and lets be honest it ain't going anywhere, Charles should step aside and let William take the reigns as king
I would thought that would be the only way they could prolong the monarchy tbh. I imagine with the Queen going this will be the opportune time for many nations to sever links with the crown. A couple of young fresh faced royals may have had more of a chance of holding it together. As it stands, if certain events conspired, Andrew isn't that far off the throne. I mean Andrew. Would any Royalist let alone non-Royalist want that?
I would have rather William become the next Monarch than Charles. I think we do need a modern Monarchy more in keeping with modern society but I do think the Monarchy still has a place in our society. Charles burned many bridges over Diana with a lot of people who are old enough to remember. I think he is seriously out of touch too. William is more down to earth and grounded I think. Something the Monarchy desperately needs right now.
