To want a Republic?

[PersimmonTree]

Nobody in the RF section can give a fact-based reason for keeping the monarchy, but there are plenty of opinions.

YABU- the monarchy are objectively better than the alternatives

YANBU- economically and morally we'd be better off as a Republic

YABU

With whom as head of state?

Take the last few PMs, lop off their title and replace with "President". Does that feel good?

I'm not sure those options really cover the bases.

If you ant to look at the evidence, from the perspective of which governments do well, have a look at a list of republics and a list of constitutional monarchies.

There are good and poor examples of both, but what you notice pretty quickly is that there isn't much evidence that constitutional monarchies are worse than republics and in fact quite a few well run countries where people have good access their rights and freedoms have them. So it's not at all clear that the UK or other countries in the commonwealth would be better off as republics.

Yabu, no contest

I came from a republic, and honestly... Meh. Both is quite meh. But I do like RF (not all of them!) more.

I don't have any skin in this game.
But I would point out that most European countries have a head of government and head of state as two separate roles.
With one being elected as part of a political party to govern and the other in a directly voted popularity contest.
The Head of States job is to shake hands and be nice to people, so not necessarily a job for a career politician.

FFS, another one of these threads.

You can want whatever you like.

You live in a place where Tories have been in power for 11 years with 3 years on the clock and going nowhere, where Brexit passed and has support, the RF is going nowhere.

YABU for starting yet another of these threads.

YABU. Imagine President Blair.

Christ on a crumpet. What exactly do you think would be different? I've lived in both. You can't tell - there's no difference.

YANBU

How is President any different to Prime Minister?

The Queen does not realistically influence politics in any way, so how would a Republic be different?

I agree though, I think the RF is outdated and monarchy should be abolished after the Queen.

YANBU. There is no rational reason to be a monarchy - if you sat down with a piece of paper now to design a political system from scratch, you wouldn’t have an unelected, hereditary head of state. How we can ever have a truly meritocratic society when the person at the “top” holds a position of influence and privilege entirely because of accident of birth is beyond me.

@ReverendRicketyCricket

Christ on a crumpet. What exactly do you think would be different? I've lived in both. You can't tell - there's no difference.

I disagree. RF is on so much merch, I always have some present for my GPs😂 Can't say the same about peesidents except Trump😂

YANB. An elected president could still be a figurehead type role like the Irish have rather than the US and we could get rid if we don't like them. People think what we have works because they like Elizabeth. She won't be around for much longer. The idea that someone is worthy of astonishing wealth funded by the state as a result of who's vagina they come out of is beyond archaic.

You can have a PM and President just an FYI.

YANBU but I look at heads of state of other republics and....

At least with the Royal Family they hold to certain standards of behaviour (most of the time) and we theoretically have some control over their actions.

I also like the fact they are politically neutral (again theoretically but we don't see much evidence of political interference).

I'm also wary about giving politicians all the pomp and ceremony that go with the head of state.

Nevertheless, I consider myself a republican and would be quite satisfied if we abolished the monarchy but think we need to think it through and put in place new democratic protections.

In the meantime, I console myself with 'better the devil you know'.

@peak2021

YABU. Imagine President Blair.

Imagine rocking up with an irrelevant comment 14 years too late. How embarrassing.

YANBU.

@RuggerHug

You can have a PM and President just an FYI.

Yes, but look at Italy and Russia. The same sociopaths shuttling between both jobs as a way of holding onto power.

Or, a benevolent aged politico having another crack at the whip - why do they need to be our head of state?

YANBU.

Charles is awful, William is awful, they're raising George. There's no hope it will get any better and once the Queen dies they all need to jog on.

The world could always use more bankers and trans atlantic club DJs.

Yanbu

@Acesulfame

YANBU. There is no rational reason to be a monarchy - if you sat down with a piece of paper now to design a political system from scratch, you wouldn’t have an unelected, hereditary head of state. How we can ever have a truly meritocratic society when the person at the “top” holds a position of influence and privilege entirely because of accident of birth is beyond me.

Political systems designed from scratch don't have a great track record, though.

I think the reason is that it is too complex a task. If you look at any older political system and how it functions, there are typically all kinds of little unexpected relationships, synergies that happen, or unwritten traditions and ways of doing things that are actually quite important to the function. You could say that there is a whole culture around governance that has to exist for the whole thing to work.

Just as in other complex systems, a lot of this is under the radar and someone sitting down to design a system could never really account for them. You also see this sometimes when a change is made in the political process, it can have very unexpected consequences.

But attempts to create some rational design for a government aren't notably better than forms that have evolved over many years, and I would say that the latter are likely to be more stable.

President and or prime minister ruling, ok fine. So the country is no longer a monarchy. The assets of the former royals - those owned by the Crown Estates become owned by ... another part of the civil service. Many who counter the "but the royals bring in tourists" cite Versailles in Paris, so expect Theme park Britain to get more Stately homes to visit.
The personal wealth of prince so and so is held by Duke of... (Former prince so and so). Or Mrs such and such, formerly princess or duchess that.

Deprive the aristocracy of their land - great, it gets bought by Fatbastid Fund Managers who dont give a rats or Cockey Keef wot maid a million selling dodgy motors in Hislington innit? None of whom have any affinity or connection with the locality.

As said above, better the devil you know.

@willibald

FFS, another one of these threads.

You can want whatever you like.

You live in a place where Tories have been in power for 11 years with 3 years on the clock and going nowhere, where Brexit passed and has support, the RF is going nowhere.

Yes another one of these threads. And I don't give a shit ! 😂😘