[Closed] The Monarchy

In all the circumstances, I've a strong preference for a constitutional monarchy over whatever Jack Straw would dream up to replace it. 🙂

The only good argument for the monarchy is they're a tourist draw.

So let's do it properly. Turn Windsor Castle into a royal theme park like disneyland with zoomy rides and students wandering about dressed as the royal family only with papier mache heads, etc etc. the kween could do the lottery show on tv, appear on celebrity big brother. The scope is limitless.

It's curtains for you, Elizabeth my dear.

I swore an oath of allegiance to the monarchy and I'm a man of my word so I guess thats my colours nailed to the mast of this particular thread.

Whilst I'm sure there are alternatives available I'm afraid that what with this country's fixation with all things American we'd end up with only two political parties in the running to field a successful candidate for the position of elected head of state. Tack on all the pathetic spin, scandal, hype and damn right embarrassing lack of decorum that would surround an election campaign for a President and it just becomes another level of political baggage for the voter to grow apathetic towards.

must resist...
must resist...
must resist

Oh bugger off

I am in UK next week end and WCA is willing to lend me his axe...

Think about this. No monarchy, alternative being an appointed president like many european countries. So who would it be? Mrs Thatcher, Mr Blair, another politician? I like the Queen pretty harmless, and she at least brings some dosh unlike a president who would just be another snout in the trough. Personally given the performance of the bunch of lying cheats at Westminster I'd experiment with a Charles as boss, ment in humour but with a grain of truth.

I predict a minimum of 500 posts on this thread.

Why do we need both a president and a prime minister?

To me, the monarchy (and the aristocracy) is just plain wrong. How can it be right to bow and scrape to other human beings, using titles like 'Your Highness'? These people only got where they are by violence and theft, surely?

Allowing the elder sibling to be heir regardless of gender is just good sense in our times of equality between genders. Besides, some of our most respected heads of state have been female, not least our current Queen.
The catholicism thing is more problematic, as the Queen is the head of the Church of England and by definition cannot be Catholic.
Interesting point on Breakfast on BBC this morning - there is actually no restriction on the heir marrying someone of another faith, such as Sikhism, Hindu or Islam, which would be even more contradictory to being head of the CofE. Goes to show how much the world has changed since that law, it used to be so unthinkable that they didn't even bother to legislate against it.

My idea is utterly brilliant because it pleases everyone. If you're anti, it'll be great to see the kween in the theme park running the log flume. If you're pro, at least the royal family is retained, only we get better value for money from them. And you could get your picture taken with the kween on the log flume.

Sorted. Next problem please...

Some people have to call their boss 'Sir/Ma'am' or 'Mr/Mrs' ........

Is this another level of oppression against the poor, downtrodden masses?

When I go to a nice restaurant I don't want the Maitre d' calling me "mate". I'm paying his wages so I want a bit of bowing and scraping thankyouverymuch.

[i]all the pathetic spin, scandal, hype and damn right embarrassing lack of decorum that would surround an election campaign for a President[/i]

Hmmm. royal family. spin, scandal, hype, damn right embarrassing lack of decorum. all apply here too...

Compared to those surrounding the trough in the Palace Of Westminster the Royal Family are rank amateurs in the world of spin and scandal. Yes there was that thing with the dizzy tart from Northamtonshire but that was purely the result of straying from years of proven good practice and marrying outside of the approved circle.

Whilst MP's are elected very few of them have the interest of their electees at heart, just getting high enough in the food chain to be able to use their influence for the good of large financial backers and hope to gain a directorship out of it when their political career is over.

Sod democracy, military junta with the current Commander-in-Chief taking on full control of her realm.

The whole premise of aristocracy is pants in the modern age. We need aristocracy like we need anthrax.

These peeps originally got their roles purely cos their ancestors were either the nastiest warlords or they were weasily conniving cheats who conned these roles for them selves. And the biggest nastiest brutes got to be the royal family. Who erm are apparently appointed by god, defender of the faith, the realm, the commonwealth, and their crest is on weetabix.

Theme park them all to death.

........ or they were weasily conniving cheats who conned these roles for themselves.

I thought you were describing the current political system of the UK there with a strong leaning towards those who find themselves on the cabinet.

At least Royalty (well at least heir to the thrones) are brought up to assume the position of HoS one day, what qualifications has your average MP got to lead this country, other than a laughable 'mandate of the masses'? Many MPs these days haven't even got any real world managerial experience having worked their way up as a 'professional' politician.

Even the great Republican himself, Oliver Cromwell, couldn't resist taking control of the country and turning it into a tyrannical backwater. The current constitutional monarchy may not please everyone but it is a pretty foolproof system with many checks and balances based on the division of control (though with largely delegated powers in the case of monarchal responsibilities) in order to prevent such abuse of power by any one individual again.

i reckon if we elect cheats we only have ourselves to blame.

Many people elect MPs based purely on what colour rosette they are wearing rather than who they actually are and what they stand for so we're bound to get a few dodgy ones slip through the net.

🙁

Ah for the simplicity of an apolitical HoS representing the UK.

The current constitutional monarchy may not please everyone

but it is a pretty foolproof system with many checks and balances

Even the great Republican himself, Oliver Cromwell

Are you saying Oliver Cromwell wasn't a Republican?

Seems to have a strange way of going about not being one. 🙄

To be honest it'd take a major shift in political will in this country to ever abolish the monarchy and we as a nation just don't have the sort of drive required to do it anymore. As long as folk on the Clapham Omnibus have enough money to fill their bellies and buy another plasma TV they are content and politicians don't really want the hassle of doing anything radical that might backfire and cost them their cushy job.

How can a country which is constantly referring to it's past and continues to lionise relics of that 'glorious' past expect to compete in the modern world? We are still living on our past glories and yes, we as Britons have a lot to be proud of, but the aristocracy and the 'royal' family are certainly not included. Their own history is full of murderers and self-serving tosspots who got where they are by force and guile (mainly force). It makes intersting history, but history is what it should be.

They can stay if they like. No power, no public money, no special laws (like having to call them some title or other) but otherwise they are harmless.

I'd like to seem them take more of a role in the public eye tho - for example, I quite like the way that Charles speaks out (unlike the Queen) but rather than spouting his own batty ideas he should talk to people (or ask them to talk to him) and raise issues in the media. Proper ones, not 'I'm so angry I lost my job' in a recession etc. All subjective of course, but at least people would get some kind of non-political mouthpiece.

That'd be a good way of using their immense media profile.

None of the politicians would go for an elected president so I would suggest an appointed monarch.

While we're at it I'm available for work with the necessary qualifications:
- Tend to put my foot in it every time I open it
- Hopelessly out of touch with popular culture
(Don't have a single speed or a fixer)
- Have a hobby which could handily utilise the vast Royal estates (Trail
centres at Balmoral, Sandringham etc?)
- Have reactionary views on architecture (although they change regularly)
- Deeply untalented water colourist (not sure whether this was Prince
Charles or Hitler)
- Do my best to promote sustainability & green issues (unless I'm offered
club class tickets)

Where do I apply?

Had a conversation with some guests about this last summer. We decided the best solution would be, when the Queen dies, for everyone in the country to have the right to call "Shotgun". According to standard shotgun rules of course.

I think that after the current queen dies - they should have a referendum at that point to see if the Monarchy should continue as-is. I actually suspect that the answer would "yes" (which would be contrary to my personal view), but I think it would be worth having an open debate.

In any case, I think it is entirely correct that there should be no religious qualification at all - it's ludicrous in the 21st Century that we are still making decisions based on what invented entity people "believe in".

"bow and scrape to other human beings"

it's just symbolic/historical

I agree with BigDummy

Surely the current idea is a bit of an emperor’s new clothes moment. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t sexual and religious equality part of our law now? Given that that law is supported at European level and is therefore senior to ours, then surely the Monarch has her proverbial backside in the air over this. So Gords doing Maj a favour then right?

I swore an oath of allegiance to the monarchy

More fool you. does not in any way mean you can't think for yourself, though. I would pledge allegiance to me Nation; never to the monarchy.

Time to get rid. The monarchy serves very little practical purpose any more, and plenty of other countries seem to work perfectly well without a monarchy, so I don't see the purpose in keeping them on any longer. Bring out Madame La Guillotine!

And in a country where we supposedly should all be treated equally, according to race, colour and religion etc, we have a Head of State who is also the Head of the Church of England. A religious leader, if you like. Indeed you have Anglican Christian Lords Spiritual sitting making decisions over things that affect all of us, yet no Catholics, Muslims, Hindus, etc. There has been a Jewish one I believe. So, Religion plays a much bigger part in the way this country is run, than it should. Far too one-sided. and having a monarchy merely perpetuates this situation. Time to get rid.

Failedengineer has it right. Our monarchy is only there through undemocratic means. How can we call ourselves a 'democracy', when our Head of State is an unelected person, there only by 'birthright'? Sod that, time to get rid.

'Appointed by God'. Well, I dispute that. Time to get rid.

Proper waste of money, an' all. Just as well they ditched most of the civil list thing; there were people born into wealth and priviledge, who had all sorts of advantages, without ever having to earn it. Whilst the rest of us have to bow and scrape to them? **** that! Time to get rid.

Retaining the Monarchy perpetuates the Class Divide. It's surely this, which holds our nation back; the public school system, Old Boy network, glass ceilings, etc. Things need to be opened up further. We have been going in the right direction, but far too slowly. Time to get rid.

I say; put a complete stop to the monarchy receiving any public money. They have plenty; let them use that, invest it or whatever, start up a business, like anyone else. All properties and lands to revert to the People, who bloody paid for it all anyway. Let them have a token residence, for the tourists, but not half of Scotland, etc. Maybe, they could all become part of the tourism industry; help curate palaces and stuff, give lectures on history, etc. Charlie would be great at that.

No more hereditary titles, after William. Any future generations become ordinary citizens.

I ain't got nothing against the Royal Family as people.

Cos after all, they are , just, people.

Time to get rid.