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

As a foreigner who has lived in many countries, with people from all over the world, not one of them gives a flying fig about the queen. They want to visit the UK but not because of the queen. The London bus, Stratford upon Avon, Cambridge, Liverpool (Beatles are loved and well known in many parts of the world).

I only know about the monarchy of the countries I’ve lived in and don’t have a clue about the emperor/kings/queens of other countries nor care about them. Only people of those countries do.

Go on other countries social media, especially the global south, commonwealth and have a listen to what they think of the British monarchy.

And listen to this twitter.com/AbbeyHeffer/status/1568272018801319939?t=B8g9hOX8MBycXolT4rApcg&s=08

Lots I would imagine. We all know what a venn diagram of royalists and brexiteers would look like!

Ireland is always brought up as an example of a democratic country with an elected head of state where that scenario has worked well in the recent past.

No-one really ever mentions the myriad countries where it hasn't worked so brilliantly.

The countries those in the UK regularly hold up as good places to live are mostly constitutional monarchies - Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, The Netherlands.

Oh, and I'm a labour voting remainder.

Remainer

I see the royal family as an asset to the uk and something to chat about and a bit like tv soap programme.

If you don't like them, just ignore the new items as it is what i do re Andrew and a handful of others and all politicians

I love British history but there is no place for a Royal family in modern society.
I don't understand why people like King Charles. I don't think he is a nice person. At least he seemed to treat Princess Diana unkindly. He also has a massive personal fortune that he is happy to sit on. Why would anyone decent want all that personal wealth for themself.
He is also such a hypocrite with his comments on climate change and the environment.

I like the Royal Family and I certainly don't want some jumped up elected President type doing fuck all and swanning around. The RF are good for the country, particularly when it comes to diplomacy etc. I think people forget the amount of work HMQ did that wasn't under public scrutiny, the hosting of other heads of state and general schmoozing all presumably to benefit UK plc. An elected president, a nobody, would have much less clout in international circles.

I like to think that the Queen and now the King are a voice of reason and restraint in their weekly meetings with the PM. No power as such but presumably as PM you wouldn't want to piss off HMQ or HMK.

I think the majority of British people are pro monarchy including a lot of young people. My DCs and their friends loved HMQ.

Love em or hate em, they ain't going anywhere.

I think the majority of British people are pro monarchy including a lot of young people. My DCs and their friends loved HMQ.

I think there’s a difference between loving the queen and loving the institution. We’re about to find out…

We need to become a republic

Absolutely this.
We need a Head of State with their own democratic mandate, able to prevent any illegal abuse of power by the Government.

Well your sister has partaken in one of their race laws (their foundational naturalisation law 1790)..white only citizenship.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790

Signed by Washington.

This race law would directly inspire the nazis in their Nuremberg race laws (as would no race mixing, anti-micegenstion, another US concept).

Lucky they don’t live in Japan or South Korea you could spend all day bowing at each other 😁

Did you just say the Royal Family are “good for diplomacy”?

I’m assuming you’re not aware of how the commonwealth countries truly feel about the history of being colonised and forgotten.

One of the former countries, India, is emerging as a world power. India is sorely reminded of the painful history because the Royal Family have insisted on insensitively showing off the Kohinoor diamond on the Queen Mother crown as if its no big deal.

The Kohinoor is a diplomatic gem, one of many, but a very symbolic high value one. ‘Kohinoor’ was trending on social meaning soon after the announcement of QEII passing.

The former colonies have not forgotten.

It’s all about control. Not so much Charles getting out of bed this morning and thinking aha I have control of the country……and beyond but “ establishment” control.
Used to keep serfdom in their place producing the crops and paying their tithe to the Lord of the manor who paid it on up the chain.
Peasants were fobbed off with the promise of protection from invaders, and later, witches.
Late 18th century huge fears that Britain would follow France and start chopping off heads.
Old verse from All things Bright and Beautiful says it all
The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate;
God made them, high or lowly,
And ordered their estate. Written during the Irish potato famine — you’re starving? Well, God decreed it, the rich are ok though.

And now it’s a great idea to have lots of crowds, some weeping, non stop news coverage. Brave Royals smiling through their grief and shaking hands, long drawn out days til a funeral. Keep the masses distracted from the economic mess the country is in, war in Europe and have a feel good “ we’re all in this together” atmosphere despite the sadness. Remind people of all the good old days —- the end of the war, street parties, jubilees. Forget the grinding poverty of the 70s and 80s.

I don't really understand your argument here. Is it that the US was founded by racist slaveowners, so I need to suck it up here?

I wouldn't mind the sort of royal family the Dutch and Danes etc have - only the immediate heirs get the life of privilege which ours take for granted - the others have (proper) jobs. Oh - I'm not so naive as to think that they don't have an easier than average life - of course they do, but they still least do something, mix with the population and find out what people (other than the ones in their sycophancy bubble) think.

While i think Princess Anne and the Wessexes seem to do a lot (and Camilla, too), the others are just parasites, and some of them (I mention no names) actively bring the royal family and the country into disrepute.

A lot of Welsh people are angry that William has been given the title Prince of Wales - and frankly, I don't blame them. Historically it is indicative of contempt and oppression, and it's also one that Charles could have withheld if he had chosen to do so. That he didn't speaks volumes.

I don't think he'll be a good king, though I hope I'm wrong, but I do think that Camilla will be a good Queen Consort - better than Diana would have been as queen - and that she may help him not to be too arrogant and blinkered. I am hoping though, that as Charles has such a genuine interest in the environment and the countryside, that he might be able to prevent fracking, which is highly destructive, taking place. However as the places which have shale gas are most likely the places where there was the most coal (ie not the Home Counties) maybe he won't give a monkey's.

Have you seen the video going round of Charlie getting cranky because a servant didn't move stuff off the table? Made him look like an entitled dickhead.

YANBU

Yes - I really thought the Queen would exercise some control over Johnson when he was behavinng in such a cavalier fashion - maybe if she had been younger and fitter she would have - but she was instrumental in allowing this country to get into the state it is now in.

Move to another country then

Oh and I’ve yet to see what I asked (a monarch owning slaves)

A mention of the delusional George III supporting it.

The statue of the Slave trader in Bristol was torn down, in contrast the US, founded by slave owners, has statues everywhere commemorating them.

You will be ‘reigned over ‘ by someone whether a constitutional monarch or a politician who has been put forward by the political club like the EU do it. I prefer our system where the monarch keeps their nose out of politics and just represents us.

Didn't it just!

And you know what they say - "When someone shows' you who they are - believe them".

Camilla looked as though she was very well aware of the "optics" - I think she would have said something to him if she could have done.