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

Of course I don’t want Andrew as king but he never will be king so the question is quite hypothetical and idiotic. And by the way thousands are lining the streets to pay homage to the Queen in Edinburgh for your comfort and joy. Some news to warm your heart

@Kellie45 I said upthread that I’m not bothered either way on the monarchy.

I’m asking the republicans on this thread what they’re going to do about abolishing the constitutional monarchy (aside from discussing it), because I’m interested to know.

That’s all!

I'm not asking about Andrew, but you know that already 😉

Why are the only 2 choices Charles or Trump for republicans? There are many functioning republics out there which have neither a pampered man-child nor a racist pervert.

Exactly.

The reason they've announced him is so we dont have time to think.

The reason they've announced him is because he became King the second the Queen died. That's how it works

This.
One person is not better than anyone else nor immediately and inarguably worthy of respect by mere accident of birth.

Tourism is all well and good but seeing as the public are being shafted from all angles it seems rather irrelevant right now. Money isn't being used to support our people. That to me, is incredibly unpatriotic.

They are an anachronism in this day and age. I feel sorry for them as a family because they've lost a beloved mother and grandmother. Just like endless families before them. They're just people. And I am most definitely not a subject.

If Charles and Di had been unable to conceive - a pretty common occurrence - Andrew would now be heir to the throne. If Edward VIII had not fallen in love with an American divorcee instead of a nice English rose, we would have gone into WW2 with a Nazi sympathiser on the throne. And, unlike Trump, there would be no mechanism to make them leave office if they didn't want to. How can anyone not see that as a huge problem?

Yep. And it's never a given that they will be forced to abdicate, as history has shown. Kellie45 is okay with this though, despite thinking a republic is bad idea due to possible Trump-like presidents. The hypocrisy is astounding.

About kings (and queens, although I don't think Queen Jane was that unacceptable) being got rid of for unacceptability, I don't know that much about it, but could Edward VIII have been forced to abdicate or not? The other examples are quite far in the past, so I'm trying to find the closest one. I thought that he voluntarily decided to, albeit under a lot of pressure. If he had married Wallis and tried to make her queen, would he have been denied the right to make her queen, made to annul the marriage altogether, or forced to abdicate? If he had dug his heels in and married her, with or without making her queen, and it was felt to be wrong but he refused to quit the throne, could he have been forced to abdicate?

I feel that a disturbing facet of this is that he was seen as unsuitable for his desire to marry a divorcee, which some people , especially working-class people, supported him in. It was the upper classes who were more disturbed by the idea. (I don't want to debate the religious implications, but I do think the whole idea of monarch as divinely anointed and head of the Church of England is questionable now when the head of the church thing was created for rather dodgy reasons -( I know the Vatican is dodgy too though), the king/queen is not a professional religious figure and church and state should arguably be more separated now that the UK is much less of a Christian country.) But the question is, were his Nazi sympathies known at that time, and if they had been, would they have been grounds for forcing abdication? (some upper-class people, two of the most infamous being Diana and Unity Mitford, had Nazi sympathies) Also I read that while king he publicly made political remarks and tried to obstruct imposing sanctions on Mussolini. His political interference was disapproved of and unconstitutional, but

The point being, of course, that 4 years later America got the chance to vote Trump out, and they did.

If we end up with a Trump style figure as king there is no democratic mechanism to get rid of him. That's the point, and it's not really very hard to grasp.

@scaredoff The problem with voting “just anyone” is the job gives you a huge presence in the world. It would be an amazing system that found the few people that would be interested in the job, could do the job well but wasn’t trying to do it for their own gain. Basically being voted in King or Queen is like being PM - whatever you do it’s better than being lower down the chain. Who cares if the health secretary or chancellor are amazing the PM is still the top job as would Queen/ King be.. The only people that want it would be self serving because no one “normal” really cares about the whole of Britain and all it’s subjects or can be impartial. Inevitably they’d be looking to change not preserve swiftly followed by the country arguing about her or him.

Having Charles means he knows what he’s doing but since he already has the wealth/ privilege yadda yadda he only way he loses if he fucks up. So he tries not to.

Perfectly put.

AND YET loads of countries manage to have sensible inoffensive presidential figureheads voted in after a lifetime of public service. It's almost like it's not a real problem.

Words fail me 🙄

On the topic of monarchs being got rid of as they were unacceptable, Edward VIII is the most recent one, so the best example. My question is - I don't know very much about it and would like to read Andrew Lownie's book Traitor King about his possible Nazi sympathies - 1. did he abdicate voluntarily, albeit under great pressure, or was he forced to abdicate? if he had made Wallis queen, or not made her queen but still married her and refused to abdicate, could he have been forced to abdicate?
Imagine that the Wallis affair had not happened - would his public political comments, attempts to block action against Mussolini's conquest of Abyssinia, and Nazi sympathies have been enough to be able to force him to abdicate, even if he refused to? Referring to the period before WW2, since if the king were a traitor during wartime surely he would be committing treason and be automatically booted out?
Surely all royals should not be able to hold the job if they have been convicted of a serious crime and should not be able to opt out of standing trial? Since they have a high profile and unelected role they should be held to a high standard and checked somehow. This refers to Andrew now but more generally since there's the aforementioned Lord Mountbatten and maybe other things we don't know about.

Voted remain and pro having a monarchy

@Kellie45 you are funny.

The idea that you bowing to the king makes you loyal to the country. How ludicrous.

@Blossomtoes it's an expression dearie. Conveying deference to one deemed to be your social superior.

Not sure what you yourself should do to the intellectually superior.

It would need to be ‘phased out’ I think. We end it now, what sense of purpose does Charles have? And William now in his 40’s who has basically been in training to take over from Charles. Okay, so he joined the forces. But that’s not really something he can go back to.
Not going past William makes sense. His children are still young and can develop healthy career paths etc. much like Andrew’s children.

Sorry, quoted wrong comment!

Not sure what you yourself should do to the intellectually superior.

Whatever it is, you’re never going to be on the receiving end of it.

Isn’t this just a argument for how outdated the institution is then……

They may well do but Trump’s a stand out example of how horribly wrong it can go. By the same token loads of countries have monarchies where there doesn’t seem to be a vocal minority agitating to remove them.