Which way would you vote in a referendum on the monarchy?

[O11]

Now that the Queen is gone, if there were ever to be a referendum, would you vote to keep or abolish?

I would vote to abolish.

Keep

The alternatives are worse.

I totally agree. Along with 'serfs' 'sheep' and 'peasants'. Anyway sheep are very difficult to organise. I should know.

Abolish

At the very least slim it down so that anyone further down than 5th in line doesn’t get a title of grace and favour house and has to have a proper job. So IMO Charlotte and Louis should be raised with the expectation that they need to work for a living.

In the days of influencers, celebs and social media it’s not so important for minor royals to go round doing shaking hands and waving at charities, so there isn’t a need for all the privileged hangers-on

In the days of influencers, celebs and social media

Give me a monarchy over all that!

Keep

What have influencers got to do with it??

There is no absolute need for a president. Most countries have one but it’s just a convention .

Btw ,get rid of the House of Lords too when binning the Firm .

Keep.

People are too short sighted to think about how awful the counterfactual might be.

I mean good god if the current conservatives and Liz truss are the best we can do democratically, i have zero faith in the path this country would choose if we were a republic.

at least the royals provide stability and continuity and raise awareness for good causes.

labour would just raise awareness for trade unions. Conservatives would raise awareness for hedge funds. As a country we’d be devoid of cultural representation of any kind for years as it would be deemed too controversial. By then it would be too late.

so fine the royal family aren’t perfect. But they’re better than the alternative.

Keep, but slim down.

Abolish.

King Charles 3rd has apparently been ordered not to attend COP27 by the PM.

So, what’s the point of a King if he can’t assert himself in any meaningful way?

Not having an utter narcisstic self-absorbed knob end as a head of state who can’t see beyond their electoral term. At least a monarch is there for however long their life lasts to keep awareness up of good causes and occasionally (like now) convince the world we aren’t all complete lunatics like our elected “leaders”.

I would rather the monarch asserted himself. He cares about the environment. As King he has a right to be at COP27 if he wants to. But the leader is telling him ‘no’.

I’d say keep if the monarchy could stand up to a leader.

Really, that comment about narcissistic heads of state resonates! I feel exactly the same way.

Keep

She’s not really though is she, let’s face it. Liz Truss has all the credibility of a steaming pile of dog poop in the woods (and I used to vote Tory). I don’t believe this headline for a moment. I suspect he already decided not to go and someone jumped on the bandwagon to make it into something it’s not.., most likely a journo.

he knows what he’s doing, he’s the elder statesman. She’s embarrassed herself and her country abd only been in the job five mins.

If she had nothing to do with it, then why have the palace decided to release a statement about the decision that includes her in that decision making process?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63105522

Read between the lines.

Charles was there last year at COP26. He’s passionate about environmental issues. Why wouldn’t he want to go again?

Liz Truss wants to get out of a lot of environmental commitments. She can’t do it with Charles there because he cares about the environment. This subject is clearly something the King and PM disagree on.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63105522

Keep

Abolish I quite liked the queen ambivalent about the rest of them. Fed up of reading about them. Also pervy Andy.

Keep

Abolish

100% keep

@nightbulb

Chuck is an 'elder statesman'??
He couldn't even sign a document without a hissy fit

He takes bags full of cash from dodgy thinly disguised arms dealers

He interferes with the plans of ELECTED representatives. He has neither the intellect nor the qualifications to do so. AND he only bothers to butt in when it's something that affects his own direct interests .
Sell off the NHS ? Children starving ? Not a word from any of them .
They cannot interfere in politics but secretly do so when itinvolves their own land or tax bill ( you can go to hell re YOUR tax bill or gas bill or hospital waiting list )

Truss has told him to not to go and he has leaked that as he's furious . He's no doubt throwing things around the room and staff are hiding in cupboards .
Truss is unpopular- how will you feel when he interferes with a policy you do support ?

And btw Charles is a first class environmental hypocrite .

Abolish.

I'd like a vote on my own head of state by the time I die, not just rolling forward forever some random descendant of some dude who happened to be a big thing in the 1400s.

Wakey wakey, it's the 21st Century now.

Keep

Keep. I don't trust or like politicians.

Abolish.
They are the epitome of the class system, and all the problems that entails.