Interesting voting at 49% YABU and 51% YANBU so far. It's close!
I love all the marching bands and the historical/ceremonial aspects and the odd wedding as a spectacle, but I am uneasy about the way monarchy embeds privilege and "favours" within the structures of British society.
I read some of the diary extracts of Alan Duncan, a former minister in the FO that were published in the press recently, and I was shocked at how many items on his agenda involved one member or another of the RF. He was frequently involved in briefing Charles on a visit to Morocco or William off somewhere else. I forget now but it seemed liked there were three a week! Although the crown has few constitutional powers; it certainly does have soft diplomatic influence. Maybe that's all to the good if they are used on behalf of the UK but the Queen has some uncomfortable alliances with leaders of countries such as the UAE www.bbc.com/news/uk-54694440.
And of course there is the question of the succession. I feel sorry for Charles really. Who would want to inherit the role of Monarch in their seventies? Does he have the right character for the job? It's said he works hard, but he lives very extravagantly by all accounts.
I'm not sure but I have a hunch there are still a lot of people of my generation who still identify themselves as "Team Diana" and they may make their views known when the time comes for him to succeed. I think the RF behaved unjustly towards her after she had steered them towards more relevant charity work (HIV, leprosy etc) for which , according to her former aide, she was asked why she couldn't support "nicer" causes like "animal charities". Also, I do not think Charles hiring a PR company for thousands of pounds to polish Camilla's image, which did so by smearing Diana's, was particularly edifying. I think we can see the legacy of those actions playing a part in his fractured relationship with Harry now.
I think the Queen has miscalculated by not abdicating sooner. She no doubt did so out of a sense of duty but all these recent "issues" are a sign of her grip at the top loosening. And by staying for so long and changing so little (she had to be dragged kicking and screaming to increase her Inland revenue payments) the crown has not modernised or slimmed down. Her demeanour belongs to a different age. I don't understand why when the now, very dignified, Princess Beatrix of The Netherlands was serving as Queen, she happily allowed people to shake her hands, got stuck in to bread making with the scouts , and ate the odd slice of cake, our Queen is "too regal" to do the same. And being seen driving to church with Prince Andrew by her side, at the time of the Emily Maitlis interview, was very ill advised.
But my biggest objection to the Monarchy currently is the ridiculous number of properties and estates they own which imho is completely inappropriate in this day and age:
www.veranda.com/luxury-lifestyle/g27044934/royal-family-homes/
In summary: radically, radically slim down or get shot entirely.
And I didn't used to think so, but if is crowned, Charles needs to serve a "representative" year or so before swiftly abdicating in favour of Wills and Kate, the latter being a huge asset to the family.