Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Royal Referendum : 1 word answer

776 replies

Justjackie · 06/03/2021 08:56

This isn't a royal family bashing thread..just interested to know how people would vote once the Queen has died and the was a vote on whether to keep the royal family or not.. a simple yes ( to keep ) or no.

OP posts:
HouseOfTheRisingMum · 07/03/2021 07:59

If it was massively streamlined, modernised and with reduced funding, then I might be tempted to vote yes.
Otherwise it would be no.

Mummy195 · 07/03/2021 08:15

@JamieLeeCurtains
I really, really don't respect William.

This.

So No from me.

PyjamasOClock · 07/03/2021 08:21

No.
Never been a Royalist, mainly for the reasons mentioned that an accident of birth doesn't make you a suitable figurehead.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

RusholmeRuffian · 07/03/2021 08:27

No

Iwishihadariver · 07/03/2021 08:35

No

yoshiblue · 07/03/2021 08:43

No

Mudflapsarego · 07/03/2021 09:09

@Justjackie

Not sure what I am going to do with the numbers when they come in 😂 but it opens your eyes to what would happen it there was a real life vote!
Is this representative though? I imagine there are quite a few "shy" royalists about who won't admit to it on here!
GruntledOne · 07/03/2021 09:10

Yes

Lavender67 · 07/03/2021 09:21

No

Parky04 · 07/03/2021 09:31

@Justjackie

Not sure what I am going to do with the numbers when they come in 😂 but it opens your eyes to what would happen it there was a real life vote!
Not really. If Mumsnet was representative of the general public we wouldn't have left the EU and Labour would be in power!
BearSoFair · 07/03/2021 09:31

Yes

purpleleotard · 07/03/2021 09:39

Yes

peridito · 07/03/2021 09:41

Hell no!

joan12 · 07/03/2021 10:02

There are just so many inspiring people who have lead remarkable lives of service, some of whom are public figures, many of whom we have never heard of. I think this would be a ceremonial and diplomatic role, but it could also be a way of shining a light on an aspect of UK life, culture, scientific, sporting, or arts achievement. How much more inspiring for young people to have a David Attenborough, a (albeit no longer possible) Neville Marriner, or any of the many scientists, computer engineers, civil servants, a retired Marcus Rashford in the tradition of Sebastian Coe, Professor Ngaire Woods, Professor Susan Springman, who I had never heard of until her recent election to be the head of an Oxford college, Prof Dame Donna Kinnear. You don't reach the top of a profession in that way without some appreciation of service, dignity and diplomacy. I do wish people could open their eyes to how positive this change would be. A message that achievement and service lead to high positions, not birth.

Some might be more to your individual taste than others, some might be more circumspect, others more charismatic/loose cannons. But the tenure would be short.

I suppose one problem is that all the dubious responsibility of taking the public eye off dubious government policies would fall on the shoulders of vulnerable Love Island etc contestants and their antics.

newstart1234 · 07/03/2021 10:24

I’m not sure what getting rid would improve though? Lots of countries with a monarchy are much more equal where the talented and hard-working get recognition and responsibility. The monarchy fill the ceremonial role of head of state only. The U.K. is hugely unequal which wouldn’t change even by scrapping the RF (which would also likely cause a stable and safe country to descend into tribal loyalties). Address the rank ineqalities first; getting rid of the RF would distract from the actual problem.

The ‘nuclear bubble’ Is not a problem for me, it’s the ‘earl of such and such’ that grind my nut it.

SpaceRaiders · 07/03/2021 10:28

No

LemonDrizzles · 07/03/2021 11:51

No

Peanutbutterandbananatoastie · 07/03/2021 13:48

@newstart1234

I’m not sure what getting rid would improve though? Lots of countries with a monarchy are much more equal where the talented and hard-working get recognition and responsibility. The monarchy fill the ceremonial role of head of state only. The U.K. is hugely unequal which wouldn’t change even by scrapping the RF (which would also likely cause a stable and safe country to descend into tribal loyalties). Address the rank ineqalities first; getting rid of the RF would distract from the actual problem.

The ‘nuclear bubble’ Is not a problem for me, it’s the ‘earl of such and such’ that grind my nut it.

I agree that it wouldn’t make to much difference to the class structure on the uk. For me it’s the symbolism that the monarchy represents, ‘these people are born better than you because god says so’.

The royal family is image that Britain puts out the the world, and that image is not good.

Trezo · 07/03/2021 13:48

No I want a democratically Elected Head of State The monarchy is expensive very expensive but even if free it would cost too much to our democracy I want a properly written constitution

Pedallleur · 07/03/2021 14:23

No

newstart1234 · 07/03/2021 15:32

Yeah I can think of a lot more important things right now. It’s Brexit all over again 🙄

newstart1234 · 07/03/2021 15:48

After financial crash, austerity, Brexit, trump, Covid 19 and (likely successful) push for Scottish independence, is rather like a politically quieter time for a few decades 😏

VegetarianDeathCult · 07/03/2021 17:52

scrapping the RF (which would also likely cause a stable and safe country to descend into tribal loyalties)

What on earth do you mean by this? Which 'tribal loyalties'? Are you suggesting the existence of the royals somehow deters political instability and crime?

newstart1234 · 07/03/2021 18:02

Some people apparently seem to think the Queen was sent by god and others (like me) don’t. Those tribes.

I’m not saying that they deter political instability 🤨 it’s just madness to poke a hornets nest for a change that would be largely symbolic imo.

VegetarianDeathCult · 07/03/2021 18:21

@newstart1234

Some people apparently seem to think the Queen was sent by god and others (like me) don’t. Those tribes.

I’m not saying that they deter political instability 🤨 it’s just madness to poke a hornets nest for a change that would be largely symbolic imo.

I don't see that it would be in the least a hornet's nest. Only the kind of mildly tragic people who camp out on royal wedding routes waving mini-Union Jacks and connubial teatowels are going to care much either way. A lot of the people with an unthinking, sentimental attachment to the monarchy admit it's the Queen they feel an affinity too I suspect because of her air of unchanging dutifulness and of not having much fun and that they don't feel the same way about Charles. Whatever one thinks of the current Sussexes Vs the RF saga, it has contributed largely to a removal of the sense that there's anything special or predestined about the royals, and probably added to the sense it's on borrowed time.

Time it right in relation to the Queen's death and Charles's succession/coronation, and one minor gaffe or revelation about some new and mildly unsavoury aspect of his past, or his finances, or Prince Andrew's alleged sex with a trafficked underage girl to come back into the headlines because he's subpoenaed or charged, or William' to divorce and/or some proof emerge of his alleged affair -- and I suspect it would take very little to change the majority public mindset from benign indifference to hostility.

Swipe left for the next trending thread