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

I can hand on soulless heart think that the economic cost of abolishing the monarchy will be insubstantial in the scheme of things. More worrying like the canary in the coal mine it will mean that the glue that holds together a happy and prosperous union will be breaking down probably in a mixture of climate breakdown / economic decline. Doesn't take a genius how the monarch will be used to frame a narrative backing wealth, privilege and power. Indeed all the panoply of this sombre occasion is it has an awesome and huge soft power.

"This is what oligarchy looks like: Today, the top one-tenth of 1 percent owns almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. The top one-hundredth of 1 percent makes more than 40 percent of all campaign contributions. The billionaire class owns the political system and reaps the benefits from it."
~ Sen. Bernie Sanders

Well it may as well carry on being the Queen/King if it's going to be someone other than Prime Minister. Many, many people love all the pomp that comes with it. They generate many millions in tourism revenue. There's really no downside other than certain Royals may seem 'undeserving' of such a role and the wealth that comes with it.

@Yubgftr So which EU country would you have preferred to emigrate to if Brexit had not happened and you could easily escape this island?

Nowhere is perfect OP, and I realise this is a hypothetical question, but I am interested in your choice of EU nation.

My point is that you can’t seriously use £2bn cost for state funeral/bank holiday as an argument to abolish, when your alternative will cost considerably more.

And if you think that’s irrelevant/worth it to meet the aims, then you’re clearly not worried about costs.

Then just say you don’t actually care about costs, you care about the principle. 🤷‍♀️

We'd be a pretty boring island, with a very boring leader if we didn't have the monarchy. It maybe shallow enjoying all the pomp and show that our national events consist of but they are world famous and bring visitors that otherwise wouldn't be too excited to visit. They bring in more than they spend and they make the country a little more special without the historical tendancy of execution and war mongering. I can't see why you're bothered enough to consider a change.

I had the privilege of hearing Tina Brown arch monarchist at the Kite Festival earlier in the year talking to the previous head of BBC News, James Harding. Candidly at one point, she said there are secrets, well known to some, that if revealed would bring down the monarchy, it brought an audible gasp from the audience and Harding tried to get her to expand but she wouldn't! God only knows what that could possibly be.

www.port-magazine.com/commentary/tina-brown/

For goodness sake in America and in most of the countries which are republics the ruling elite own most of the cash. The Clintons are incredibly wealthy people with most of their wealth coming from sources which have been questioned

If we don't want a boring leader, we could elect Timmy Mallett 🙄 as if that's a good reason to prop one fairly average, scandal-ridden family in the lap of luxury for ever more

Then just say you don’t actually care about costs, you care about the principle. 🤷‍♀️

I care about the principle. I don't actually know about the costs because it's extremely complicated, depends on how and when it's done, includes a lot of intangibles and externalities, depends on how others react, and is probably not entirely predictable. Same for the costs of keeping.

We'd be a pretty boring island, with a very boring leader if we didn't have the monarchy.

What an awful thing to say about your country and the people you share it with.

Problem is, we have no say in whether it is or isn't! Prince Charles is well known to be one of the more extravagant members of the royal family. And whether the monarchy is slimmed down or not is entirely within his say. I can't see him personally slimming down his own operations and properties! But one can hope I suppose!

I agree with pp who said that royalists should be enthusiastic about a referendum on this issue, because (a) according to them the monarchists would win easily and (b) the monarchy could then proceed with a positive assent from the people. So why all the extreme defensiveness I wonder? Why do people who happen to disagree with you have to leave the country?

Incidentally, what about the the many British citizens who already happen to live abroad? Do they get a say too? Or is Britishness just about paying tax?

I object to the OP's sneery tones about medieval life, as if this generation is the first to question the rights and power of the monarchy, being, as we so clearly are, better educated and less manipulated by societal influences 🙄

They generate many millions in tourism revenue

Do you really think Charles or William will draw people to Britain? I don’t, they want to see the Crown Jewels and opulent palaces. Those two just do not have gravitas like the Queen did. No way they’ll generate ‘many millions’ 😂

(Disclaimer: I'm 16) I personally think the Queen seemed to do a good job - though she did lobby for laws affecting her to be changed and there is also the question of presiding the Mau Mau and other war crimes - although I don't know much about the situation so I don't know how much she was aware or could have intervened. However, I'm not sure if I agree with the argument that President Trump/Boris/Blair etc would be worse than a monarch. It was mainly accident of birth that we got an (apparently) good hereditary monarch - while they are trained for the job, some just don't have the right temperament etc (I don't mean Charles as we haven't seen much of him as king yet). If Margaret had been born first it would have been Queen Margaret, which wouldn't have been ideal.( although her behaviour could've been partly as a result of Peter T and resentment at being second-born).

It is said that the monarch as head of state checks the powers of the head of government - but if the Queen/King's Consent is just a formality, how do they do that? And if they needed to check the head of gov, but didn't, how would they be made to? People talk about soft diplomacy,which is useful, but how do we have control that the monarch does what is in the UK's interests, and what the majority of the population want? We have no say in what sort of soft diplomacy they do, indeed not very much knowledge.

I do think a referendum should be held on the monarchy every time there is a handover. People talk about expense, but we hold general elections every 4 years - would a referendum be more expensive than a general election, or is it just the added cost of having one at all that people object to? If it only took place after a handover, it wouldn't be very regular. People say that if most people don't want a referendum, even an infrequent one, it shouldn't be done, but even if most people didn't want a general election it still happens. I think the head of state should be nationally chosen too, even if from a hereditary pool.

The US is a very different country - I don't know very much, but I doubt there would be a horde of armed, conspiracy theory -fuelled, far-right protesters taking over Downing Street led by Boris shouting' To Parliament!' if he were President and voted out. I'm not sure if a President is better than a hereditary elected or unelected monarch, but just because the handover was peaceful doesn't mean that should be the maximum standard. We have elected bad PMs too, but people don't say they should be hereditary and non-elected. Yes, there is a problem of rich businesspeople and dynasties dominating American politics, but there is a similar thing here with a rich family as a hereditary head of state, and mainly rich politicians becoming PM. At least, the US President is elected. People elected Trump, George Bush etc - if they had seen through them they could not have got to where they did. If Prince Andrew had been firstborn, we wouldn't have that chance - it would be King Andrew.

Hear hear!

The thing about Prince Andrew is that you’d never know he was schtupping underage girls if he was heir to the throne. He’d have been extremely protected.

On the Tina Brown secrets thing, Andrew Lownie's Mountbattens bio is interesting. One theory he quotes an IRA man saying is that Mountbatten was murdered as he was going to reveal a royal family secret that would bring them down. (but given the source, one wonders about that credibility)Then there is another rumour he quotes that Philip had an illegitimate child in Australia - but many royals, esp men, have had similar (look at Ed VII, or maybe Princess Margaret), so I'm not sure if that's very shaking. What is most disturbing is that Mountbatten was very likely a paedophile, and this was likely covered up by the Royals. Andrew is awful and the guarding of him is disgraceful, but if the quotes in Lownie's book are true, Mountbatten abused boys many times, and some were as young as eight.

The costs! Britain is on it's knees even John Redwood has asked for Parliament to be recalled and the conference season to go ahead. James O'Brien diplomatically got back to the news as usual and thank god for that.

www.businessinsider.com/store-closures-for-queens-death-could-harm-uk-businesses-2022-9?r=US&IR=T

@beatrice14 thanks for that insight. That's probably some of what she was referring to. His statue is behind Downing Street and Uncle Louie was Charle's greatest mentor and confidante. The FBI implored Andrew to cooperate with something which he said he will but never has. It was telling that the Royal Family with both the payment, stripped him of rank and titles and put him under virtual house arrest.

But nothing so far - some people are above the law regardless of the crime and the monarch actually is as he is the law. The establishment knows these things to be true but if widely known and admitted to would indeed cause huge reputational damage which is why they don't.

www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2019/08/26/news/new-book-links-lord-mountbatten-to-sex-abuse-at-kincora-boys-home-1694271/

How do you think a complete overhaul of our parliamentary system, or judiciary system would aid in the above?
Do you think it would cost more than, or less than, £2bn?
Would it take more than, or less than, 10 days?
How do you think the effects of a vote for abolition would effect our global standing?
What do you think the global effect of that uncertainty would do to interest rates?
Who in society would such changes detrimentally affect the most?
we would have to have a constitution of some sort. How long would this take to design and implement?
And what would the cost be?

There are many valid reasons for wanting the monarchy abolished, but ‘saving money’ isn’t one of them.

As it happens, I agree with the latter point. My observations related purely to the immediately shorter-term state of the nation, and that fact that these expensive, ostentatious displays for the obscenely privileged are not exactly to everyone's benefit in this context.

The longer-term is a different question, and this is merely the beginning of a series of inevitable questions following Elizabeth's demise. Even in the years leading up to it, those questions were already becoming louder and more insistent. Many of those with an abiding loyalty to her personally claimed not to extend that loyalty to her would-be successors. We'll see what 5 years of Charles III does to public morale.

An immediate, revolutionary ousting of the system right now would, I agree, be to no one's benefit. In any case evolution and not revolution is the British way, and I suspect the change will happen with a whimper rather than a bang. There would need to be detailed, careful reflection of how an overhaul of the British constitution - IMO so anachronistic as to be no longer fit for purpose in the 21st century - would benefit the nation. There are many successful models of republicanism throughout Europe and beyond. At the very least, what Britain desperately needs is less ostentation, a proper system of PR (not the patched-together mess we were offered in the last referendum), and elected Head of State, and an elected second house rather than a system of heredity, elected on a separate cycle to the general election.

My own objections to the monarchy are mainly political as opposed to fiscal. Exemption of one family from the FOI act. The fact that the sovereign should not be required to pay taxes to 'their' own treasury, and that they consequently pay an amount they think they will, that we are not allowed to know. That they have a meeting with our elected PM weekly, the content of which we are not allowed to go. The inheritance tax scam. The unique ability to influence legislation that isn't to their benefit (cf. the 'green law' and vetoing of compulsorily purchasing the Queen's land in Scotland). The opacity of their finances, PR, and the whole system through which their business is run. The Duchy of Cornwall - well, show me a Cornish person impressed with Charles's dealings in their locality. The Welsh, some of whom are perturbed at having yet another English Prince of Wales foisted on them without asking their opinion on the subject. The much more serious fact that they are apparently above the law, and think that if they leave the mud to dry for long enough, it will brush off. & so on, & so on, ad infinitum ...

Its clear that Charles III will usher in the end of monarchy in this country. He's an elderly man , pampered his whole life, perpetually waiting for an obsolete job. First the commonwealth countries will break apart and then he will make a political intervention too far. Off he pops !

Tony Benn's 5 principles of democracy.

“What power have you got?”
“Where did you get it from?”
“In whose interests do you use it?”
“To whom are you accountable?”
“How do we get rid of you?”

——————————————

^^ This is seriously spot on!

I do wish we could have a referendum on the question.
I would vote abolish. I bet the result would be tight.

Yes, and in Lownie's book he says that while he got some of the Mountbatten info via the Freedom of Information act, some parts of the FBI files are still redacted, and some files were due to be released but then had the release postponed for a further period. The fact that one of the informers about the paedophilia was lady-in-waiting to the Queen Mother suggests that the royal family must almost certainly have known.

Great post from beatrice14 you will go far! 👍😊

Thank you