Advanced search

This is not an anti-royal thread.

(30 Posts)
MayaAngelCool Fri 18-May-12 23:54:30

I'd genuinely like to understand what people think is the point of the monarchy, because I just don't see much point apart from tourist attractions, and for that we have Madame Tussaud's wink

Please go ahead and explain in as much detail as you like: so, for example, if you're going to say 'continuity', you need to explain exactly what you mean by that and how you think it's beneficial.


sleeplessinsuburbia Sat 19-May-12 09:46:35

And the point of a head of state without any power is??? Attend opening ceremonies?? Magazine sales??

MayaAngelCool Sat 19-May-12 13:45:23

Arf at sleepless! You said it better than me.

And gawd, yes, there will always be Dubyas throughout history but at least you can get rid of them without a guillotine wink.

I didn't know that about Germany's system; perhaps I should learn more about how other states handle this (obviously for the day when I'm asked to redesign our constitution!).

henrysmama2012 Wed 30-May-12 20:04:24

I think they are pointless - in terms of tourism all the tourists would still come if the Royal Family was no more...

MayaAngelCool Wed 30-May-12 20:25:42

Well I can still see no point in having a monarchy in this day and age.

In them thar olden days, monarchs would actually, literally lead the country, taking them into battle and taking responsibility for the success or failure of their country. There were tough decisions to be made for the benefit of the country, and the monarch would take them.

How different is that role from that of today, where Queen Elizabeth's position means nothing more than icing on the national cake. When people today talk about why they love the royals, their answers can be summed up thus:

Their existence makes some people feel nice for a bit.

That's it. Nothing more in it than sentimentality created in the heart of the beholder. I'd say that's a pretty poor investment from the national coffers.

QueenEdith Wed 30-May-12 20:32:55

I think there are huge advantages to a constitutional monarchy and a non-political head of state.

Separating those functions gives a different reach, internationally (and one we have done well from), and has provided benefits to eg charities and other organisations who find a Royal Patron enormously important.

There is no way one President could cover what the Royal family does. And I suspect that if there were an elected one, he'd be claiming he had a mandate, and putting time into politics not the current work portfolio.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now