To think the monarchy is regressive and should be abolished?

[Muezza]

The principle of the monarchy, that they are superior people because of the family they were born into/married into is completely regressive and embarrassing for us as a country.

All the hoopla around the jubilee is cringe worthy

You do know it used to be and they could legitimately claim all of it?

Maybe that’s the solution - a sort of annual Royal Hunger Games - could make loads of money on the streaming rights for the NHS.

Winner gets to be Monarch for a year.

Whatever side you are on, it is very healthy to see more debate/questioning about the RF now. Their wealth is astronomical just for being born, and much of it is and was generated by somewhat dubious means. The Duchy of Cornwall for example, the way the people of Scilly as tenants are treated is just not on. And to me it always seems that whatever wealth they have is never enough for them. Just by being born. Their wealth was not earned, it was inherited from someone who was also just "born" or married in. We are not allowed to ask any questions, their wills are sealed, but yours and mine are open to scrutiny by anyone as a public record. A lot can be done if there is little oversight correct?

It is all very fine to say that Charles and William have plans to drastically slim down the hangers on and streamline the RF, but I very much doubt that will be at the expense of their own private wealth - accumulated just because they were born.

Regarding a Republic and an elected president, it is very feasible. But - the voting system of FPTP would need to change. That is so undemocratic and I don't think a lot of people realise it. Same system in the US BTW. So a candidate can be elected on a certain number of votes, but the combined votes for all other candidates in the field exceeds his or her total vote. That is not representative at all. So either STV/Proportional Representation is something that is far more important than ditching the Monarchy. Think hard about the FPTP and you will see why the same party continually wins with the odd incursion by the other, but rarely if ever an Independent or one of the smaller parties.

My apologies for going on and on, but forget about personal insults to the RF and ask why they are what they are? It is because of tradition, privilege, and they cannot be held accountable ever.

Do you remember the It's a Royal Knockout?

I can't even.

You do know it used to be and they could legitimately claim all of it?

No they couldn't.

It was set up to fund the running of the state. Army, parliament, justice, all that stuff. George III couldn't be arsed with all that, so cut a deal and handed all that responsibility to parliament.

And no it was never in their private ownership, no.

You might want to do a bit more reading as I know this is a favourite topic of yours, so best to be informed 😉

@CurlyCew agree. First Past the Post is not the best way to give democracy its true weight. That’s why we are in a mess with the limited choice of party and PM and potential PM.

I quite agree

I’m in no way a royalist, but I like the fact we have a monarchy. It does give us a point of difference. And despite some British people being negative, other countries seem to love our royal family and that encourages tourism.

I fear this is just yet more of the ‘cancel culture’ rearing its ugly head.

Not just grouse, but all sorts of rare and red listed waders nest successfully on grouse moors - curlews, lapwings, golden plover and so on.

Yes, managed burns take place on grouse moors during the winter months, to provide the mosaic of habitats favoured by grouse (and other birds). Grouse moor managers argue that this not only provides a mosaic of habitats which favours grouse and other breeding birds, but also prevent wildfires.

And it seems they have a point, given the numerous wildfires on unmanaged moorland. These release far more carbon than the managed burns (which don't touch the peat layer):
Marsden Moor: 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022
Dovestones: 2020, 2021, 2022
At least four of those were in the breeding season.
And I could go on.

I don’t mind the royals. I reckon they generate more money for the country than us presidents, and stay neutral.

They are normal people who are lucky to have been born into an important family. Many people in U.K. are luckier to be born in U.K. rather than some countries where life is more difficult. I’m an immigrant from one of the ex colonies.

CANCEL CULTURE KLAXON.

No one listens to the rich people any more! Their voice and influence is literally zero! They've been CANCELLED! WAAAAAAH!

CANCEL CULTURE KLAXON.

😂

They are normal people

Sure, they are. Just worrying about how to pay their fuel bill like everyone else.

Normal people. Lol.

Mommabear20 · Today 14:03
I love the monarchy and the history and so wish to keep it, but I'd majorly reduce the 'senior' royals to the monarch, heir apparent, and the next heir and the next etc. so just the Queen, Charles, William and his kids. The rest should all work for their money and pay for their properties, possessions, and weddings themselves with no input from the tax payers.

^^^THIS^^^^

@browneyes77 Okay so I appreciate there are decent arguments for and against keeping a constitutional monarchy- but come on! framing a desire for a republic as “cancel culture” is a little bit of a bloody stretch. I mean cancel culture is about social and professionally ostracising people who don’t share the same social values as you, how does this fit? Republicans are trying to replace an undemocratic institution with a democratic one which better reflects the will of the people! they’re not trying to oust the queen because she misgendered Eddie Izzard or something

Massively reduced down, keep some pomp, but get rid of all the hangars on.

They are normal people

well that's the dilemma isn't it?

If they are normal, why are we pouring such privilege and power into their laps?

If they aren't, what is it that makes them not? Blood? Divine providence? Does anyone believe in that sort of shit anymore?

There is literally nothing about the royals which is normal.

Cancel culture is ostracism. Pure and simple.

If you want the monarchy to be taken away/abolished, then you want them ostracised, because they would no longer have any professional or social meaning.

So yes, I do think it’s cancel culture.

I don’t think their situation is normal - but I think they are pretty average people, who happen to have been born into a particular family. The reason I think we should continue to have them is from a utilitarian perspective they provide more benefit than drawback:

1. tourist income - they kind of are part of a living history. I personally am more interested in visiting places where they still carry out ceremonies that have been going on for a long time, rather than museums.
2. lack of having to run expensive election for a president - who will undoubtedly also be a ‘privileged’ person.

I personally am more interested in visiting places where they still carry out ceremonies that have been going on for a long time

You can still do all that crap. I went on a trip to St Petersburg years ago and they had all the horses traipsing round the imperial palaces. Much more fun than anything I've ever seen in the U.K. it's not like the royals make an appearance for the tourists.

lack of having to run expensive election for a president - who will undoubtedly also be a ‘privileged’ person.

check out the Irish system. Extremely cost effective and they've had brilliant figures, not from privilege but who have achieved a huge amount in their own right.

Seconding to check out the ROI system!