I don't want to be 'reigned over' anymore

[Yubgftr]

While I totally respect the Queen and how she served the country, I think it's now a good time to end the monarchy as I think modern society has outgrown it.

Just the idea that someone inherits the job of head of state through birthright and reigns over us peasants is crazy in this modern age. Then all the ceremonies, titles, line of succession are remnants of a completely different era and tbh remind me of episodes of The Tudors or Game of Thrones, it's just so archaic and out of place.

I think having to bow and curtsey to people just because they were born or married into a special family also seems ridiculous. Why should I have to curtsey to any of them? Not saying I'd be rude or disrespectful but having to bend my knee to a set of people as if they were deities, it's just insane! I think I'd actually feel humiliated.

I also don't get the fawning and crying outside the palace - by all means be respectful and recognise her contribution but crying about someone you've never met? To me it's OTT

Back in medieval times when there was little education and religion was used to manipulate the masses, I can understand why all the peasants went mad for their sovereign and saw them as annointed by God etc etc but we're much more enlightened now (most of us!) so we need to make way for a new way of doing things.

Even a new national anthem - why is it all about the king or queen and god saving them? Why not about the people, the nation as a whole?

That said, I also hate the idea of someone like Boris Johnson being head of state and I bet that's a role he'd go for if we were a Republic. Swings and Roundabouts!

YABU - God save the king, monarchy forever
YANBU - time to end the monarchy

Very interesting voting, OP you’ve clearly hit a nerve (and I totally agree with you).

oh and the tourism myth is just that, a myth, albeit one that seems hard to kill. There is zero evidence that the royals themselves bring in tourists - just look at the most visited places. It’s absolute insanity to suggest if we became a republic tourists would stop visiting - the UK is steeped in history and beauty, that won’t change!

Why have so many posters said 'you can leave the country...' as though not loving the Queen / royalty means you're not welcome.

The massive irony is that that sentiment is actually about as un-British as they come, as this is a free country.

The original poster even said they would not be disrespectful if they were to ever meet royalty, just that it's an outdated idea. It's a valid point and anyone saying that such sentiment means they should / could leave the country is against British values.

Personally, I think the idea of a royal family is insane, if it were to start now. But given the tradition and history, I think they add to 'brand Britain' and as one other poster stated, they're nothing more than show ponies now. Can just leave them be.

I completely agree with OP

Elizabeth has been a great queen but her sons…

both Charles and Andrew have a provable history of liking underage girls it’s embarrassing and disgusting.

Exactly, they can't do this so it's always 'off you pop'. Such a balanced and strong argument from them. 😂

@Yubgftr Theres always a head of state and it works better when it’s not the same as your current prime minister or president.
They are treated deferentially as other people are with influential jobs and not because anyone believes they innately special. They have wealth but so many others have huge amounts of money too. Public and independent schools are churning out rich, powerful kids from rich powerful families every year. This won’t change if the Royals go.
Personally I think having a family whose only job in life is to represent us is fine. They take it seriously, we don’t have to have divisive votes on the matter. It’s also useful that the countries physical history is theirs and ours. The castles, the Crown Jewels and all the rest are still intact and not lost to private homes.
if it’s not broke don’t fix it I think.

When you say 'end the Monarchy', what do you mean?
Assuming you no longer wish them to be guillotined as in the French Revolution, then do you mean, remove the titles, and / or remove their wealth.
If you mean, remove their constitutional role, then they would still have a title, and they have private houses/estates (Balmoral, Sandringham), apart from the state palaces (Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle).
I understand Princess Beatrice's husband has a title, even though it is not used in his country, so I guess even if the titles were removed, people would still use them.
If you confiscate private wealth, then there are plenty of people (some with titles, some without), who have plenty of land, so where do you stop?
My own view, is that over time, the Royal Family should lose the reverence/interest they currently have and become more like those on the continent.

I have no problem with having a constitutional monarchy and think the majority of the UK would probably vote to keep them for now.

But I'm really disgusted (and I know its over-used as a word) at the people like @WhileMyGuitarGentlyWeeps telling anyone who no longer wants to have a monarchy to "just leave". Or saying "you ok hun?" at people who question it. Frighteningly stupid, unkind and horrible.

You do realise, right, that a constitutional monarchy has a symbolic function in a democracy and the whole point of a democracy is that people get to voice their opinion and, God forbid, vote to change things if they don't like them? Yes they are probably in the minority for now but how on earth do you think things get changed if people don't argue their point?

The idea that if you oppose having a monarchy you ought to leave the country is like something out of the dark ages. Some of you people need basic lessons in citizenship and government.

That's a pretty naive view.

I agree with you OP, I think the whole thing is ridiculous. The queen dying was sad but that’s it now, the whole pantomime should end with her.

Back in the day kings would go to war with their fellow men - they would lead armies and have an actual input into the affairs of the country. What do they do now? Smile and wave?

Prince George always looks utterly depressed - you never see the kid smile. Imagine being a child and knowing you will never get to be “a vet” or “a doctor” or “go on holiday with your mates” because your whole life is planned out for you, you will never be allowed to do what you want with your life - Christ even their romantic partners have to be approved by the firm. Imagine if he were gay? I can’t imagine he would be allowed to be gay.

Catherine/Kate whatever never looks happy either, bet she’s been told she will never be allowed to divorce so again, smile and wave.

Absolute farce.

I watched the cortege travel through Scotland yesterday. I felt immense pride in my country (Scotland). There was a sense of unification. The President would likely be English and have no connection to us at all. The Royal Family love staying in Scotland and Charles has his Dumfries House project. All that would go.

Replace them with waxworks, wouldn’t make any difference to the people who think they perform a “job” for the tourists and much less chance of them touching up kids 🤷‍♀️

I think the majority of people will never meet a royal. Be glad of the ancient traditions which have kept us safe.

This is also not the time

Britain is a famous for being the mother of Parliaments as it is for the Royal Family. Personally, I don’t need a “liege Lord”. I don’t like the snobbery of the whole system.

Fortunately the Queen was able to pitch the thing just right and made invitations to royal events more inclusive. But if you had someone as monarch who felt it was all about them and not about the country - then it would be monstrous. And there is something about the extremely entitled position they are in which has created some very spoiled individuals in that family. Imagine if Andrew was now monarch instead of Charles.

We all felt we knew the Queen and she did a good job. But we could have an elected figurehead just as well. Plus a strong Supreme Court to keep that person in line!

The way things have gone in recent years, I'd be happy for The Windsors to have all the power and run the country. Someone has to be in charge, and 'the public' don't have form for choosing their leaders well- King Charles could probably do a fine job!

Quite honestly, the monarchy is one of the most interesting things about Britain. Remove it, and you’re just same old, same old as everyone else.

I absolutely agree.

^All of this.

Getting rid of the royals won't get rid of privilege, the class system, the lords and ladies, and the immense amount of corruption and nepotism which goes on in positions of power (*side eyes Boris....). Unless you're advocating Communism, then getting rid of the royals achieves precisely nothing.

The royal family are essentially brainwashed from birth into accepting that the country comes first. Charles has had his dodgy moments in his personal life but he's matured, and his commitment to work, the country and the environment has been outstanding. Same with Prince Phillip - he may have had many, many flaws but he was ahead of his time with environmentalism.

Any elected system is deeply problematic. Having a royal family is a barrier to the country ever sliding into an authoritarian regime. And while they're symbolic, watching the programmes on the queen in the last few days, I have realised that I didn't appreciate even a quarter of the things that they do. It's really fucking hard work.

We wouldn't suddenly be better off financially if the royals were stripped of their assets. It wouldn't ever reach us. It would be siphoned off by those in power and millions would quietly vanish.

I think Charles and William will be more robust with any prime minister who rocks up and clearly spouts lies. Charles has spoken about wanting to slim down the monarchy.

We desperately need someone our PM is accountable to - and not another elected figure which can be manipulated and bought for favours. I can't see anything that offers something better than the royal family - and don't forget, they're our servants actually. Charles said as much in his speech. They're not better, and you don't have to be subservient.

On a personal note, I like the traditions and the fact that this is "our" way of doing things. It sets up apart and is part of our heritage, and I'd be very sad to lose something so quintessentially British.

But conversely we know about Andrew because of who he is. There were many other wealthy and powerful men involved in exploiting those girls. No one gave a shit about Epstein until Andrew came along. We will probably never know who else was using the girls unless Ghislaine talks. Public scrutiny is the downside to being Royal and something the rich can buy their way out of.

I agree OP.

Do you have a passport? Use it.

I love our constitutional monarchy. I genuinely think we have the best system of governance in the world. I can’t think of a country that has as good or better to be worth the disruption of changing.
as another pp said even if you removed the Queen/ kings constitutional duties as head of state they would still be king / queen just with a better easier life.
yes constitutional monarchies throws up the odd ball king or queen now and again but so does a presidential system e.g trump and arguably that is going to be the case more and more in our social media world. Whereas we get a head of state that has spent years in training and knows what to do/ learns the ropes etc and power passes peacefully ( no sign of a Jan 6th moment here) Even Prince George is in “training” and he won’t become king for 50 years or so.
I think people that want to “ end the monarchy “ need to give positive reasons for doing so not just negative and need to propose an alternative system ( not presidential as that is very divisive- look at America!)

😆

Err...Bill “I did not have...” Clinton, Barack “Hussein” (emphasis on Hussein from half the populous that despises him) Obama.

And the current one, “sleepy” Joe.

All partisan (supported by half, hated by the other half). The US is arguably the most divided, volatile nation on the planet (most certainly in the west). They have folk storming buildings if their leader doesn’t get back in.

And Britain is a republic (“royal republic”). Parliament is the governing power (has been since 1689). It has a monarch in name only.

Look at the mess in the Supreme Court in the US - it's the perfect example of nepotism and political bias. What's happening over there is utterly horrific, created by Trump loading up the Supreme Court with his picks.

Elected officials can work very well but there's a huge risk. That's why I think someone who's not elected is best placed to be our figurehead. Someone who's been primed from birth.

Interesting point about Andrew - even setting aside the sex stuff, he'd have been awful, as would Harry (not slating Harry, just wrong temperament). I think it underlines how differently the actual first-line heirs are - they all seem to have a huge sense of responsibility which isn't seen in their siblings. Of course, it's too soon to see how William's children turn out!

Totally agree.

I don’t really understand how people are complaining about the cost of living yet want to abolish the monarchy.

Do you know how much money it will cost to change the entirety of our system?
Absolutely fucking billions.

If you don’t like the monarchy, fair enough, but don’t pretend it’s due to cost of living or whatever.

A state funeral or coronation will have nothing on a complete overhaul.

And a president will need changing a lot more often than a monarch

I’m amazed at the number of people who didn’t know that immediately a reigning sovereign dies the Heir Apparent becomes Sovereign. “The Queen is dead. Long live the King”.

There is no gap between sovereigns, no 48 respite from being reigned over, no choice in who wears the Crown.
This will be the second Coronation for me, I’m the same age as King Charles 111.

I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes right now, his mother has just died, another poster mentioned that in any other job a death of a parent would mean compassionate leave. Instead he is front stage and centre with his every public move being scrutinised by the world watching. He made a very moving speech within hours of her death followed by other public duties in the days following.
He must be exhausted.