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

For people talking about the royals' soft power and how much they are loved in former colonies, important to distinguish between what heads of states are forced to do to keep bilateral relations going and what ordinary people-especially the younger generation- think of the Queen. apnews.com/article/queen-elizabeth-ii-king-charles-iii-new-delhi-government-and-politics-75998b34449dbbf771a5adfc6831c478

Could you give some examples of things Elizabeth did that improved the lives of people here

Come on, the younger family members were everywhere on the front line during the COVID crisis, and of course they handed back all that unspent sovereign grant money we give them for hosting foreign dignitaries, didn't they? It's not like they sat at home for months in their comfy fully staffed country estates occasionally phoning in a heavily staged zoom chat.

Once the hullabaloo is over and the hysteria dies down it remains to be seen what an ageing King and his consort on foreign travels will do, represent or shudder even be popular. The Royals' worst nightmare is saying doing a US trip where there are sparse crowds and even worse Meganhite protesters at the "colonial crown".

I do find it fascinating how outraged we all become at hypocrisy, obfuscation, tax evasion, PR spin and general double standards by politicians but seem happy to accept these same traits in our royal family.

Btw, the royal palaces may well be kept in trust for the nation - that’s you and me - but I can’t imagine we’d ever be allowed to have access to ‘our’ palaces. That’s why I object strongly to paying to visit somewhere like Buck.Palace when in theory, it belongs to us all anyway and the sovereign already receives funds for its maintenance.

@AuxArmesCitoyens 😂

I must agree that was one of the things I liked best about the queen-I never even noticed her 99.9% of the time. Quite unobtrusive, really. Her kids seem a different kettle of fish.

@vera99 I see you're Shifting The Goalposts now its clear you've failed to support your initial assertion the Queen was intervening in the 2014 Scottish independence referendum.

Especially since the Ashcroft Poll demonstrated it wasn't in any way influential to the result.

Now, you've come round to MY point that what the Queen said was very neutral and others were attempting to put their own political spin on it.

As for the King, your assertion is also a non-sequitur fallacy as he already made clear he will do as his mother did. It's one thing declaring views as a Prince and quite another doing so as a Sovereign Monarch. He knows the crucial distinctions between the two roles. Your position is also a False Dilemma Fallacy.

So fifty years of pulling strings behind the scenes no longer counts since he's promised he won't do it again? Right. Got it.

@downnative - you certainly keep me on my toes as I waste excessive time on an internet forum -but you can't win 'em all! Sounds like a need a lawyer to screen my posts😅

Are you seriously suggesting that people in this country feel oppressively 'reigned over'?

Bizarre idea considering all the other things in the forefront of out minds at the moment. I bet it doesn't even figure on most people's list of worries.

Republicans always bring up this 'I'm not a subject, I'm a citizen' line. I'm a mild monarchist (not through ignorance - long consideration) and it just never occurs to me to think in this way. I don't know quite what a citizen is, other than someone who lives in a city (French Revolution - great, citizen had pretty unpleasant connotations there, I think you'll find - like 'comrade' in Soviet Russia).

Cross it off your worry list, I say! It's a massive non-issue.

I agree with you 100%, CulturePigeon. A lot of twisted knickers on this thread.

Any knicker twisters want to get really angry head over here ---->

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4632844-center-parcs-closing-for-funeral

She shook Martin McGuiness's hand

I think accusing women who disagree with political status quo as having their "knickers in a twist" is misogynistic.

Tax 'em

www.nytimes.com/2022/09/13/world/europe/king-charles-wealth.html

Charles, who formally acceded to the British throne on Saturday, spent half a century turning his royal estate into a billion-dollar portfolio and one of the most lucrative moneymakers in the royal family business.

While his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, largely delegated responsibility for her portfolio, Charles was far more deeply involved in developing the private estate known as the Duchy of Cornwall. Over the past decade, he has assembled a large team of professional managers who increased his portfolio’s value and profits by about 50 percent.

Today, the Duchy of Cornwall owns the landmark cricket ground known as The Oval, lush farmland in the south of England, seaside vacation rentals, office space in London and a suburban supermarket depot. (A duchy is a territory traditionally governed by a duke or duchess.) The 130,000-acre real estate portfolio is nearly the size of Chicago and generates millions of dollars a year in rental income.

The conglomerate’s holdings are valued at roughly $1.4 billion, compared with around $949 million in the late queen’s private portfolio. These two estates represent a small fraction of the royal family’s estimated $28 billion fortune. On top of that, the family has personal wealth that remains a closely guarded secret.

@derxa
Yes I agree re her appearance in Dublin , that was a very good thing and took generosity of spirit from both sides .

The posters quote though was:
'The Queen was a nice person with good values and had a positive impact on a lot of peoples lives so I'm not anti-monarchy at the moment

I was asking for examples of how the queen had improved people's lives
Though I do note the link with the queen per se - she's gone and a lot of goodwill slowly gained over 70 years may go with her

DarkShade · Today 14:08
I think accusing women who disagree with political status quo as having their "knickers in a twist" is misogynistic.

accusing ANYONE who disagrees with you as having their ‘knickers in a twist’ is belittling reductionism. I get to decide what I care about. I’ve had a bellyful of being told what all the nation is feeling by the media already.

@Otezres
Very true

There is a lot of 'off you pop' ' leave the country ' ' oh dear you are worked up' 'this thread is for royalists only' going on .

Shut down your opposers when you can't articulate a response
Shutting down of dissent happening on the streets too.
It's having the opposite effect though thank goodness

@Novella4 indeed. The BBC is doing a sterling job for the Republican cause. Centre Parcs is playing it’s part too! The competitive ‘respect paying’ would be funny if it wasn’t so sad. I’m impressed and amazed that so many people are questioning the status quo.

@Otezres said: "Or did you mean that I can do all of the above without fear of death/gaol and I’m ‘lucky’ to have a right to free speech?"

There are a few different metrics that measure states with respect to democratic freedoms (with some pros and cons and debate, but broadly similar) and the UK is always in the top 20 states in the world. I'd prefer to be in one of those locations rather than not.

For many years I've had co-workers from around that world that didn't have such opportunities. Where I live today in the UK if a person has the wrong flag on their house today, it can be serious trouble. It's far from perfect, but I'd consider myself fortunate to be here.

McGuiness was already democratically elected and 100% accepted by the Rev Paisley aka the Chuckle Brothers long before she shook hands and tbh it was more of a gesture by SF, who had shied away from meeting the Queen.

It would have been very strange if she had not respected a democratic vote and refused to shake hands with him.

BUT lets assume she did do good with that gesture... what did she then do by signing off the Withdrawal Agreement & the NI protocol, which has put the GFA at risk?

Can't have it both ways.

The ‘leave the country’ responses on here are about as intellectually mature as my y7 debating club.

I’m a republican and would welcome intelligent debate.

Would you have the grace to shake hands with the head of an organisation which murdered members of your family? Religion is hated on MN but the Queen was a Christian and believed in forgiveness.

Sounds like we need him as Chancellor of the Exchequer rather than Monarch.