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

Yeah an “embarrassment” that brings unquantifiable wealth to Britain. This “embarrassment” is why cameras around the world are following every move this week (and more generally, constantly). This “embarrassment” is why world leaders are climbing over themselves to pay tribute, why business leaders (such as Jeff Bezos) do likewise, and why the news networks have been so mocking.

Plaudits and generating huge wealth, I’d love to be this form of an “embarrassment”.

If Charles had died before having children, we would now have King Andrew. The heir to the throne inherits the throne, regardless of how unsuitable they may be for the role. It's completely random; if the idiot sleazeball (possible) sex criminal is born first, they get the job.

I wonder how many of those who support the continuation of the monarchy would feel the same if some dreadful calamity were to wipe out William and his children, and we were faced with the next royal family being headed by King Henry IX and Queen Meghan? I presume a lot of the bile spewed about them comes from supporters of the monarchy, because for republicans, it matters no more than any other celebrity.

At least if the head of state is elected, we have the chance to get rid if they turn out to be useless.

We should have an elected upper house, too, while we're at it, not one packed with govt donors and similar lackeys.

A better system than a powerless, non partisan, unifying, figurehead as head of state?

Where?

I feel it would be sort of a shame to totally end such a long line, but I'd think it'd be totally fair to stop giving them any state money and let them live off their (vast) land holdings, which would be plenty of income, and become more like the Dutch and I think Danish monarchies which exist but are much lighter-weight, don't have some much security etc.

I thought this by Nesrin Malik in the Guardian was spot on. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/11/queen-britain-sacred-national-image-national-royal-fallibility

get the likes of Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Angela Merkel.

Did you mean that tongue in cheek?

I wouldn’t want any of them either.

These threads always descend into such nastiness with personal insults being thrown around and demanding people 'leave the country' because they dare to have a differing opinion on the monarchy.

It's a shame we aren't allowed to have a reasonable discussion/debate on here without the royal fanatics coming along and ruining it.

Something like what Belgium has, maybe?

What do you mean "the general public are never asked"? What do you think polling companies are for?

This is the latest poll on the subject:
docs.cdn.yougov.com/tzluoaf4hh/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20-%20Views%20of%20the%20Monarchy%20Survey%20Results.pdf

A pretty decent majority. Why waste money on a referendum that is a foregone conclusion?

Clear off then

I love this argument.

Do you really think no one would pay to visit the royal establishments if there was no longer a monarchy?

The most visited palace in the world is Versailles and the French definitely never overthrew their monarchy…

With the technologies that currently exist, a referendum needn't take three years to organise and if it became a standard procedure following the death of a monarch then it could be built in to the protocols following the death of a monarch.

But it isn't a standard procedure, and no one said it was going to take place this time so I'm not sure why you "don't understand" why Charles was proclaimed King so quickly. Yes, you are naive if you genuinely thought they were going to halt 1000 years of succession to the throne to have a ponder about whether to bother this time.

Make me?

The new Tebbit test:)

Edit to say I meant Europe!

Ireland seem to manage it. They’ve had some fine Presidents, Mary Robinson, Mary McAleese and now Michael D Higgins.

I wonder how many of those helpfully suggesting some posters should just "clear off" or "pop off" had a hand in the decision that made it much more difficult for many people to do exactly that?

Not an option, sadly.

Apparently Brexit has rendered travel abroad next to impossible. As well as super gonorrhea, inevitable.

The US was founded by slaveowners.

Eight presidents owned slaves.

Two of them, Washington and Jefferson, took out adverts in newspapers to get their runaway slaves back.

blogs.loc.gov/loc/2019/10/runaway-how-george-washington-and-other-slave-owners-used-newspapers-to-hunt-escaped-slaves/

Now I’m not aware of any monarch owning slaves (Slavery was never legal in England)...perhaps they had some overseas? If (and it’s a big if) you have to go back more than two centuries. Contrast this with the US.

Mount Rushmore has 4 presidents sculpted on it.

Washington - owned 600 shaves
Jefferson - owned 600 slaves
T.Roosevelt - called for the massacre of the natives “nine out of 10 (natives) died, and I won’t inquire into the health of the 10th”
Lincoln - “I am not nor ever have been in favour of making voters or jurors of XXXX (term for black people), nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people”.

Is there any proof of the "billions" they supposedly bring in? This is just a baseless theory thrown around with no evidence behind it.

Tourists coming to the UK to visit our historical buildings doesn't equate to them visiting because of our current royal family.

@LePigeon Indeed, as evidenced by the thread I started last night. I have made the mistake of thinking MN is rather like a debating society! Most people have not read at all what I've been trying to discuss and just got themselves outraged and had a go at me. Silly really.

By "allowed to continue in office" you mean "was re-elected by an increased majority at the subsequent election". The public clearly didn't care in large enough numbers.

And why did France overthrow their (absolutist) monarchy?

*clue, answer is in the question.

Is that the best you can do?

By that measure the Queen is very unpopular given the vast majority of people didn't line up to wave at a car go past.

I think there’s a natural upturn in support and fondness for the monarchy in the immediate aftermath of the queen’s death.

The undertow of increasing disillusionment with having royal family is still there. I bet in a few months’ time it will come to the surface once more. Charles will have a big job to maintain the current momentum of favour. I hope he makes some big changes in terms of scaling it down.

I am well aware of US history. But I am talking about the royals here. Besides, my sister is a US citizen and she is not required to fawn over Jefferson as a test of belonging.

This on the royals links with slavery. Not a big if. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/25/slavery-royal-family-jamaica-ducke-duchess-cambridge-caribbean-slave-trade