Abolishing the Monarcy.

[Helendee]

Good or bad idea and reasons for your opinion?
I don’t feel strongly either way but I am curious about what aspects of becoming a Republic are more beneficial than the UK’s stable current system.

@StoneofDestiny

So we’d all rather have some cheesy president of the UK would we?

Britain can choose from it population a President (short term post) to represent the country at functions where a neutral figurehead is needed. We can design the model, not copy someone else's.

No extended family taken care of, no weddings paid for, no private planes, boats or trains, no grace and favour homes for endless relatives, no protection if they break the law etc etc

It's not beyond the wit of our country to sort that out.

And if the people chose a President who turned out to have stood up for paedo clerics or anything, we'd have the option of electing a different one next time round.

@BLToutanowhere

The Queen also does a lot of diplomatic work. She's played nice with some absolute scum bags over the years for the good of the realm. (yes, that includes certain former presidents too)

From all accounts, she's also very frugal and manages to keep costs down.

You put the government in charge of the estates, watch costs rocket and also get ready for El Presidente to start demanding outgoings fit for the office.

Oh yes, would you be sitting down to watch the 3pm 25th December party political broadcast?

Why assume we would have a political president? The whole point is that we could design the new structure any way we choose. We don't have to have a US style president with power. Why not emulate Ireland?

@KeflavikAirport

Be honest- is this ideological change any different from Brexit? Will is cause less damage and upheaval to our country?

Haven’t we all been through enough recently? I would quite like a few years without a deeply divisive, pointless issue tearing us all the shreads.

Abolish
No place for it in a modern democracy . Some auld bat and her seedy children propping up the class system whilst we have children in our country going to be hungry - no way !

@BelleSausage, amen sister. A decade of gentle boredom is exactly what we need now.

Definitely abolish.

@BelleSausage

Corruption? Are we really free from that curse? didn't the Queen recently interfere with law to prevent her business deals being scrutinised?
Or her friendship with the rulers of the UAE?
Ever wondered why all govt ministers are either millionaires or very quickly become them when they leave Govt or how Tony Blair escaped prosecution or Bojo, acting illegally, escapes accountability?

Why compare us to Brazil or other south american states? why not France or Germany?

However, i would prefer not abolition but a slimmed down version, with no imagined constitutional powers, their properties could then be opened up far more to tourism.

@PicsInRed,

"Perhaps the worst could have been avoided had they willingly gone."

You are under an illusion.

Alfonso XIII of Spain stood down after a national referendum on the abolishing of the monarchy in 1931 and a Republic was formed.

This did not stop a bloody Civil War from 1936-39 (Republicans v Nationalists) which left 500,000 not dead including 150,000 civilians who were executed.
A dictatorship under General Franco then ensued.

The Spanish Constitution of 1978 re-established a constitutional monarchy as the form of government for Spain after the end of the Francoist regime and the restoration of democracy by Adolfo Suárez in 1975.

The queen is the symbol of the inequality that the UK is already well known for, where we have the vast wealth of the top fifth, mostly concentrated in London, living side by side with families who are dependent on food banks.

She does almost nothing, has done almost nothing, with her life beyond a few scripted statements from a room packed to the gills with gold furniture to further underscore the inequality that she represents. She has failed to ever make a positive impact on the lives of British people beyond saving them for as long as possible from Prince Charles.

The other members of the royal family are symbols of what? Depravity? Infidelity? Inability? Idleness? Princess Anne is probably the only member of the entire extended family who gets up in the morning with a plan for the day.

The UK's closest neighbour, Ireland, is a perfect example of a republic that has ousted an unwelcome monarchy and replaced it with a stable presidency. They do it, incidentally, by having proportional representation, which the UK's current incumbent party benefits HUGELY from the lack of, and will therefore never allow.

Proportional representation would ensure that democracy here actually started working, and although I think that the royals should be rounded up and shipped off to whatever leaky castle they actually legally own in their own right, it probably shouldn't happy under the current unequal and undemocratic electoral structure.

So abolishing the monarchy would feed the poor and right all wrongs?

You are all living in the wrong century and have no grasp on the real world.

The monarchy is no longer a seat of power. Bloody revolution (or even quiet revolution) always leave a power vacuum that causes massive upheaval.

France and Spain are fantastic illustrations of just that.

Hilarious that anyone living in the modern world this that the monarchy questions is so pressing in such unstable times.

No, it’s ideological purity that will only cause more uncertainty and not give an ounce of benefit to the man on the street and almost certainly increase cronyism and injustice- power abhors a vacuum.

Communist Russia anyone?

@crosspelican

But Ireland didn’t have a monarch. They had ours. And wasn’t there a little thing called ‘the troubles’ because of the split from the union?

Was it an entirely bloodless transition? And how much did it cost?

@Twizbe

We tried to be a republic once ... it didn't last that long and we asked the son of the king we killed to come back.

We'd need to do it better than we did then.

We were not a republic. We were a commonwealth.

Charles 1 needed to go as he saw himself as an autocrat.

And to the delight of the Irish, he was replaced by Oliver Cromwell.

An autocrat,

I was being facetious about that aspect. Sorry if that was not clear enough.

I doubt there would need to be a 1916 style Rising to oust the monarchy in this country. Apart from anything else, I doubt they have the ability to put up any kind of organised resistance, especially after the Queen dies and their popularity collapses.

No, it’s ideological purity that will only cause more uncertainty and not give an ounce of benefit to the man on the street and almost certainly increase cronyism and injustice- power abhors a vacuum

Perhaps no more than your belief we are better off with a Monarchy?

But if the monarchy has no power, why would abolition leave a power vacuum?

We have vast inequality and injustice now, even if nothing to do with having royalty (so as they don't prevent these things) what does the monarchy actually do?

Perhaps once Queen Liz, Philip & Charles are gone the monarchy will probably have a much different 'feel' to it.

It is annoying that when Queen Liz dies Charles will of course still want his title of King even though he's in his 70s.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the cost of a state funeral & then a coronation & the face of our money & everything else to change, for it all to happen again not too long after when Charles dies will be massive on the public purse?

It’s the actual cost.

That is highly debatable. Why not include security costs and the cost to local councils of royal visits? Is it because it bumps the "actual cost" up four or five-fold?

Their financial dealings are well dodgy. Pitch@palace anyone?

If you think the royals are above political meddling, I've got a bridge you might like to buy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_spider_memos

Why not include security costs and the cost to local councils of royal visits? Is it because it bumps the "actual cost" up four or five-fold?

Because if you had a president you’d still have those costs. How much does security for politicians and former politicians cost? We’re currently paying for security for five former prime ministers, I bet that’s costing the taxpayer at least as much.

You would have costs for one individual and probably their spouse and kids. Not assorted random cousins and hangers-on for life.

@MsMiaWallace

Has William had affairs??

I'd never heard this!!

It's been kept out of the British media. But there's been a lot of talk about it elsewhere.

@GeordieGreigsButtButtZoom, re what happens if Charles dies before Elizabeth. It's debatable that William would inherit from Charles what Charles never possessed - the throne.

The Duke of York would arguably have a claim.

But it's not Tudor England, Andrew and his family are not popular, and William and his family are. So it should be a shoo-in for William, with the Queen's blessing.

I can't see Andrew rallying any troops to his cause, somehow. But it would be an interesting scenario for wonks.

@KeflavikAirport

You would have costs for one individual and probably their spouse and kids. Not assorted random cousins and hangers-on for life.

It’s five already!

From all accounts, she's also very frugal and manages to keep costs down

Dont doubt this. Remembering the tupperware of cornflakes on her breakfast table decades ago.
BUT one woman being frugal has no effect on the 1,000 staff cost or the men in grey suits who can spend what they want on maintaining this fairy story.

I posted this below on an M&H thread, apologies to repeat but it's my view!

I honestly think for some, they are just something to hang on to, when the world is bonkers, politicians are beyond awful... they bring a sense of normality for some. And bear in mind the MSM are partly responsible for feeding us an endless diet of royalty whether we like it or not

However... that is changing as the royal teatowel owning brigade die off and younger people either don't care or actively think they should be consigned to history. I'm old and can see both sides. We've been indoctrinated over generations... stamps with the queen's head on, passports in her name, money with her face on etc etc. It's like we know no different.

Palace officials create a carefully managed image of them, we can only know so much and at the head is the Queen... a woman who has chosen never to give an interview so we don't know what she thinks, she's an enigma. We don't know her character whatever anyone says, we don't. We see her as a dutiful, wise old woman, there is nothing to contradict this as there isn't allowed to be.

At the moment, the alternatives are non existent because there is no worthy figurehead around, the alternatives are appalling and divisive and given that a large percentage still support Johnson, I wouldn't trust the public to vote for the right sort of person to represent our Country instead of a Monarch.

I do think things are going to change greatly for the RF in the next few years, bring on a slimmed down version and let's see how that works for starters.

Yes, five individuals elected to the highest office in the land and who have served their country, whatever you make of their politics. Not five families and their random cousins And of course you're overlooking the fact that in your system we're paying for them AND the royal family and their random hangers-on.

Oh dear,
Have non of the anti-monarchists on this thread ever heard the expression 'nature abhors a vacuum'?

If monarchy ceases to be - for whatever reason - then something needs to replace it. This may not be a better deal.

The Russian Royal Family were all shot at the beginning of the October Revolution in 1917, which then installed Lenin as a leader of a communist government. If you think communism improves the rights of the 'man in the street' and makes everyone equal - forget it.
People were still starving while Lenin had a Rolls Royce ( I've seen it in the Lenin museum in Moscow).
They had pseudo-democracy with elections with only one candidate standing.
For years Communist Party Members had 'perks' right up until the USSR was disbanded.

So all of those who whinge about the privileges of the monarchy, suck it up, the alternative could be far worse.