Should the monarchy end with this queen?

[ivykaty44]

YABU Charles will be the next king, we can’t pick and choose and the system should go on

YANBU the monarchy should end and we get to vote on a president in future

I like having a royal family because the way ours is still doing royal stuff, it's unique to us. I'm glad that Harry broke out though and don't envy any of them.

Yes it should.

@ivykaty44

We’ve missed our chance for a good old fashioned revolution.

My theory on that is, the English aristocracy saw what happened in France and were very keen to send those they thought would be starting a revolution to Australia. Get rid of the fit poor and you the chance of revolution diminishes

Ha. I’d never made that connection. You might have something there.

Charles can't help that sustainable fuel wasn't available sooner.

He could help his extensive use of private jets and helicopters. And what about his several estates, which are all very costly and energy intensive to run? If he actually was serious about this stuff he'd restrict himself to one, small, environmentally low impact dwelling.

"We’ve missed our chance for a good old fashioned revolution."

It's why King George V wouldn't allow Nicholas II of Russia to be refuged here. People would question it and realise that they had power to change society's structure.

@Snog

I don't want a royal family - I don't think they are good figure heads or role models and they hoard wealth whilst UK citizens use food banks, struggle to heat their houses and have inadequate health and social care.

Billionaires can also piss off, they are all evil in my opinion.

Precisely. Wealth hoarding does not a healthy, productive society make. Similarly to the billionaire class, nobody needs a billion pounds. What strikes me as interesting is something about the British psyche; hear me out - Jeremy Corbyn was regularly lambasted for daring to own a house in 'fancy' Islington, from what I see his house looks like 2 shoe boxes stacked on top of each other but yet the chancellor of the ex chequer is quite literally a billionaire and stripped away the £20 universal credit uplift to not much fanfare It's almost as though the public like subjugation.

"He could help his extensive use of private jets and helicopters. And what about his several estates"

As the future King of England he's a target. Many of the places that he goes to don't have direct flights. He's traveled to attend funerals etc. It would be a security nightmare and at times impossible. I thought that he farms organically and uses sustainable/natural methods on his estates? If they were under the care of the government we'd either have houses or train lines instead of the green spaces.

@Mountainpika

Would we want to run the risk of having a president like Trump?

Given the fact that Brexit and Johnson happened I think that's a real concern.

As the future King of England he's a target. Many of the places that he goes to don't have direct flights.

Gosh the excuses just keep rolling in dont they. All the more reason for a lower profile head of state. Our Irish president has a much lower carbon footprint that Charles who's only an heir still.

I thought that he farms organically and uses sustainable/natural methods on his estates?

That may be, but what about the enormous, costly houses that he inhabits. He could run his farms without those.

There seems to be a lot of support on this thread for keeping the monarchy which surprised me.

It does feel like many seem to be OK with it as it's (now) an old woman but won't be when there's a man on the throne.

@Mumoblue

Yes. They should go. We can keep the palaces and tourists will still come. I find it absurd that we have a monarchy in this day and age. Not to mention, are they going to re-mint all the currency to update to Charles? And then again when HE dies? Waste of money.

No you just change the monarch and keep the previous coins.

When I was a child there were plenty of coins with George VI on and even the odd few George V coins.

Yes. Get rid of them all, and open up Windsor etc for tourism.

There seems to be a lot of support on this thread for keeping the monarchy which surprised me.

MN is not typical in this regard unfortunately.

However, keep the faith. I suspect a very large section of royalists aren't royalists at all, they mistake that for liking the Queen as head of state. I'd be keen to see the polling figures 5 years into Charles reign.

@GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing

I’d prefer we didn’t have a monarchy, but I accept that most people in this country prefer to have one (not scientifically researched, and god save us from any more referendums)

I’d be perfectly happy with just a much slimmer down monarchy. The numbers of hangers on need to be massively reduced. You only need the monarch and any direct heirs involved, the rest is just a waste of money.

I agree with that.

The Monarch -v- The PM. I'm not a monarchist but I have to say at the moment the hereditary monarch seems to be a better leader than the PM.

‘ The Monarch -v- The PM. I'm not a monarchist but I have to say at the moment the hereditary monarch seems to be a better leader than the PM.’
It’s not either or - we can have a Prime Minister AND no Monarchy.
We can have a PM and a separate elected head of state.
We can have the House of Commons AND an elected 2nd chamber that replaces the hereditary Lords.
Some People on here are so wedded to the Royals that they seem to be ignoring other democratic options that many countries have…

‘There seems to be a lot of support on this thread for keeping the monarchy which surprised me.’

There’s a lot of respect still for the Queen, I have a lot of respect for her despite thinking we should get rid of the system she heads up.
I think it’ll change a few years into Prince Charles rule.

@Furbulousnous

‘ The Monarch -v- The PM. I'm not a monarchist but I have to say at the moment the hereditary monarch seems to be a better leader than the PM.’ It’s not either or - we can have a Prime Minister AND no Monarchy. We can have a PM and a separate elected head of state. We can have the House of Commons AND an elected 2nd chamber that replaces the hereditary Lords. Some People on here are so wedded to the Royals that they seem to be ignoring other democratic options that many countries have…

Well people normally look to replace the monarch with a president, see USA, France, Ireland and many many more.

The thing a PM and a President have in common is that they are elected and that doesn't seem to be going well at the moment. Obviously Johnson has his fans but for me if I was on a lifeboat and had to choose who to give the last place to , the Queen or Johnson, it wouldn't be a hard decision.

The thing a PM and a President have in common is that they are elected and that doesn't seem to be going well at the moment

But a PM and president don't do the same job. Please do look up Irish presidents and see the type and calibre of people who get elected there, in what is the most equivalent model to the U.K. system (i.e. power wielded by the PM with a president/monarch in a more ceremonial role).

Have just watched a video of the Queen cutting her cake for the jubilee, anyone else think she's looking thinner than normal? Her clothes are hanging off her a bit which was surprising.

‘ The thing a PM and a President have in common is that they are elected and that doesn't seem to be going well at the moment. ’

For? It’s working perfectly in Ireland. As I said before I would rather vote for my leader than be told I have to have the son of the Queen. I would take pretty much elected ANY leader over Charles, even if my choice lost the vote.
Boris Johnson being a fucking lazy, over privileged buffoon doesn’t make me think I’d rather have an over privileged UNELECTED buffoon instead.

It’s not surprising that someone should lose weight after a bereavement.

William took the train and Charles was flown in by the RAF using sustainable fuel.

"sustainable fuel". Pull the other one. Anyway you're missing the point. What the fuck did they bring to the proceedings in the first place? They are unelected and have no expert knowledge. Them not even turning up would have made fuck all difference.

English aristocracy saw what happened in France and were very keen to send those they thought would be starting a revolution to Australia

Not just your theory, pretty much what historians have been saying ever since.

@Furbulousnous

‘ The thing a PM and a President have in common is that they are elected and that doesn't seem to be going well at the moment. ’

For? It’s working perfectly in Ireland. As I said before I would rather vote for my leader than be told I have to have the son of the Queen. I would take pretty much elected ANY leader over Charles, even if my choice lost the vote.
Boris Johnson being a fucking lazy, over privileged buffoon doesn’t make me think I’d rather have an over privileged UNELECTED buffoon instead.

I mean the elected PM isn't going well for the UK.

Well you can think what you like and so can I. I'm looking at what has happened here and the example I have of what people are prepared to elect is Johnson and it gives me no confidence in what the result would be if they elected a president.

The fact that other countries manage it is no help if the British see Johnson as the sort of leader they want.

If I compare the two I'd choose the Queen over Johnson any day of the week and I'm not a monarchist, if the Queen or any of the rest of them were passing the bottom of my road I wouldn't go out to wave, couldn't care less, if Johnson came I'd go out to boo.

I know how it works in Ireland, I have dual nationality and the fact we are neighbours very definitely doesn't mean we are the same.