If you had a choice, would you vote to keep the monarchy?

[katemiddletonsnudeheels]

Or not?

And what are your reasons? :)

I don't think anyone is going to say of Charles that he's above politics and doesn't get involved, are they?

He's not the monarch.

Yes. I'd vote to keep

Tell them to become self sufficient. End their life long tenancy in the same way. In the same way other benefit claimants are having to face an uncertain future and being made to feel like parasites. Its really immoral, the level of privalidge they are presented with from birth. It is one thing that makes me really ashamed of my country. We are backwards for still having them. The Americans might think it is quaint but they also think we are bit mad for having them.

No, Mango, but I believe he is the Queen's son and so will be the next King - that's why I used the future tense ('is going to say').

Fancy camping out to get a glimpse and fawn over someone that lives off the back of others.

I hope I see the day when Harry is on the Jezza Kyle show having a DNA test.

Yes.
Keep them.

But we don't get a vote do we? That's the problem. If we had a vote the Queen could stand and we could elect her. Or not. All those saying it should skip a generation after Charles and go onto William could vote for that. Or we could vote for someone more representative of modern Britain.

All those who dread President Blair or President Dave could vote them out after a few years. That's how a democratically elected Head of State works.

As it is we are stuck with Liz until she pops off - which might be tolerable - then we'll be stuck with Chas - no matter how bonkers his interventions become.

Get rid.

Get rid . Vote for a president who comes from the charity sector or the arts. Disbar politicians and anyone whose tax affairs do not stand up to public scrutiny.

I'd keep, I can never coherently explain why, except I'd rather have a constitutional monarchy than a republic. Most people that share my left-leaning political viewpoint seem to want to get rid - but I just don't want to live in a republic.

It may be because I have great admiration for the Queen, or that I like Helen Mirren. I may change my mind if/when we get a monarch I'm not keen on, I like William a lot though. And Harry.

No matter how compelling the arguments might be financially for keeping the monarchy (though to be honest I don't find them particularly compelling) I simply cannot get my head around the concept of somebody being born to rule over me in the 21st century. To be honest, I also find it bizarre that a baby should have its entire life mapped out by being born to rule!

So I would abolish the monarchy and all hereditary titles for that reason alone.

We have one of the greatest legal systems in the world and a system of parliamentary democracy that works. It really shouldn't be beyond us to find an alternative to a monarch as Head of State. As much as I dislike Boris Johnson, London has managed very easily to elect a mayor for a fixed term who is an ambassadorial figurehead for the city (as well as having some limited policy making powers). I simply don't see why it would be so difficult electing somebody for a four or five year term to act as our head of state.

But I am resigned to the fact that it won't happen in my lifetime! I still don't quite understand all the curtseying to and fawning over one fairly ordinary family though.

That's a good idea sue51 - maybe someone like Camila Batmanghelidjh - as they're all white as white!

The idea of the Queen ruling of us in any way is pretty ridiculous now, the role is largely symbolic, but many of us like having a Royal Family - and I suspect that HM would get a greater percentage of people supporting her than the current democratically elected PM.

get rid. the thousands and thousands spent on them each week when people are having to go to food banks to survive is obscene.

We need Zaphod Beeblebrox as president.

Keep them. Would much rather have them as a figurative head of state than some ghastly politico. When Tony Blair was on his holidays, we would have been represented by John Prescott!! Surely that is enough to turn anyone into an ardent monarchist!!

When Tony Blair was on his holidays, we would have been represented by John Prescott!! Surely that is enough to turn anyone into an ardent monarchist!!

John Prescott was running the country as the deputy prime minister when Tony Blair was on holiday. It has absolutely nothing to do with the monarchy.

Get rid. They have no place in contemporary life.

I think the message it sends to the rest of the world is so sad. Have we so little confidence in ourselves as a nation that we cling to an outdated and useless institution to give us meaning and presence in the world?

And the arguments to keep them give me the rage - they're so weak. Tourist revenue - there's no actual evidence to support this whatsoever. And great counter examples from US and France who are incidentally the most visited countries in the world.

And why oh why is Tony Blair always brought up in the royalty versus presidency debate? As if it's somehow a straight choice between him or the royals . Ireland have done a good job in selecting presidents who have distinguished themselves in the world without being too driven by their own personal and political agendas. And Ireland's general political culture is very far from perfect, so there's no reason at all why UK can't do the same.

"When Tony Blair was on his holidays, we would have been represented by John Prescott!! Surely that is enough to turn anyone into an ardent monarchist!!"

Not really. I have more respect for even that colossal cunt IDS than any royal.

She works so hard in a role that most of us would find tedious and stressful.

I think many people would be willing to tolerate both the tedium and stress of her job for her compensation.

Yes. Why change it? We have, in effect, a republic with an hereditary head of state. What do we gain by having to elect some 2nd rate politician every 4 years or so? It won't save Mon

Posted too soon!
It won't save money as we will still have to pay for a head of state plus the cost of the elections. Why fix what ain't broken?

I think many people would be willing to tolerate both the tedium and stress of her job for her compensation What at 90?

Irish presidency costs a mere fraction of what the royal family costs. I've seen figures, but can't find them right now.

Irish presidency costs a mere fraction of what the royal family costs
In Lady Windemere’s Fan, Oscar Wilde had Lord Darlington quip that a cynic was ‘a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.

Get rid.

We could have someone decent as president and vote them out periodically. Of all the people in England we are represented by that dull bunch.