Goodbye Monarchy, as is

[Poopoolittlerabbit]

that’s it really. I’m not fussed about the ‘king’ -
happy to downgrade the entire system.
the jewels, the palaces, the changing of the guard belong to the country, and/or people … if Charles buggers off we keep all the tourist attractions, and all that people say makes the royal family worth while ££
now the Queen has gone, the ‘firm’ needs to go
done with them. AIBU?

I’m much less bothered about the monarchy than I used to be. It’s essentially ceremonial anyway. Charles signing laws into being/having a chat with the PM is politically meaningless. He can’t realistically refuse to sign something or tell the PM what to do as the concept of monarchy by consent would instantly end.

After the shitshow of Brexit, I would absolutely want to know what the alternative looks like and what the process would be to get there before voting for it. I’m not keen on the American or French versions of presidency and am not sure whether the, say, Irish or German versions would be worth the effort. On the basis of the last 10 years or so, I also don’t trust my fellow citizens to vote with any modicum of sense. Sometimes the status quo is the least bad option.

@vera99 oh my goodness I hadn't seen those before 😂

I’m not mistaking anything.
I honestly couldn’t care less either way. It would have zero impact on me and my life if we got rid of them or if they stay.
Some people are very happy with the current set up where we vote for our MP, the party who get the most MP’s choose a Prime Minister and the Monarch oversees it all.
I don’t think they’re stupid or mistaken. I think they just have a different opinion to you. That’s all.

‘It’s essentially ceremonial anyway. Charles signing laws into being/having a chat with the PM is politically meaningless. He can’t realistically refuse to sign something or tell the PM what to do as the concept of monarchy by consent would instantly end.’

So why bother?

you’re seriously underestimating the power and influence of the monarch.
the Queen was from a different world, a different era. She’s gone and so should most of the ‘traditions’ that allowed her to become the most famous woman in the world.

Do you expect other countries to apologise for their empires or just the British?

I think they should be abolished and have a president. And before anyone starts: it won't be like the US where PM and Head of State are the same person. It would (could, should) be more like France or Germany where the roles are divided.
And it needn't be an ex-politician. My current favourite pick for president would be Doreen Lawrence (slightly political because she sits in the HoL)

My MIL absolutely adores the RF, but a while ago we were having a (light-hearted) conversation about who would make a good president. She opted for Monty Don, which I thought was a lovely idea.

Doreen Lawrence would be good, and it would enrage the racists.

I'd go for David Olusoga or Mary Beard though.

‘She opted for Monty Don, which I thought was a lovely idea.’ ha!
I’d opt for Monty Don’s favourite spider plant over the current monarch.

Yes, the Irish famine where 1 million died and 1 million fled the country reducing the population by 25% whilst the British establishment looked on and did nothing 1845 -1849 - no wonder that the Union Jack is called the butcher's apron and not a single apology ....

'The genocide of the Great Famine is distinct in the fact that the British created the conditions of dire hopelessness, and desperate dependence on the potato crop through a series of sadistic, debasing, premeditated and barbarous Penal Laws, which deliberately and systematically stripped the Irish of even the least semblance of basic human freedom.' When blight struck the Irish were 'totally vulnerable'. This was a 'nuanced genocide', he continues, one that manipulated fate 'by pushing a people to the brink of annihilation and turning away so not to hear the wailing

‘Doreen Lawrence would be good’

I’d happily vote for the immigrant Briton who was awarded an OBE for services to community relations and has dedicated her life to campaigning for justice for victims of racist crime.
Put Doreen along side of Charles and tell me who’s the more worthy leader? Who’s more likely to understand what it is to live in modern Britain. Who’s the better role model to young people? Who’s more relatable?

@vera99 its almost pointless trying to get the English in particular to understand anything about the Famine.
they gloss over it very glibly in their history text books… and any talk of it on MN usually has people frothing at the mouth claiming the British either weren’t responsible or are they supposed to apologise for EVERYTHING now??

I think it's hilarious that a 74 year old man who committed adultery whilst in waiting to be King is now Head of the Church of England and has a job for the first time in his life.

I don't think he is all that bright either, and has the personality of a plank. But that's subjective, my first sentence is fact.

Interesting discussion, @Poopoolittlerabbit.

On a personal note, I woke up a #miserablebastard and yet you put a smile on my face with 'a Ham Christian Andersen story book'. Thank you.

‘I think it's hilarious that a 74 year old man who committed adultery whilst in waiting to be King is now Head of the Church of England and has a job for the first time in his life.’

well, yes there is that.

After the shitshow of Brexit, I would absolutely want to know what the alternative looks like and what the process would be to get there before voting for it.

This is absolutely crucial, yes. But it's a conversation which, following the death of Elizabeth II, was inevitable. In reality it had started many years before, and the questions surrounding the future of the hereditary constitution were already growing louder and more persistent.

@AutumnCrow if I’ve made even one person smile today, then it’s already a good day! You’re welcome.

Doesn't anyone do history anymore? The church of England was formed by an adulterous man who happened to be king

Currently, according to polls over the last few years, about 60% are in favour of keeping it 20% opposed and 20% unsure. Though of course it’s not a fair question, in much the same way it’s not fair to ask citizens of China if they oppose or support the communist party - British citizens have been told by the legacy media and establishment institutions since their birth that the British monarchy is a Very Good Thing. Indeed there were calls in some quarters for Queen Elizabeth to receive a sainthood for … being monarch for a very long time.

So in the context of a generally fawning media and a cultural landscape which glorifies the concept of monarchy (which of course is not always the same as glorifying specific individuals - see Harry, Andrew, etc) 40% not actively in favour of retaining the monarchy is actually pretty high. Of course the status quo will always have a huge advantage. And in modern Britain there is very little that unites the place anymore apart from the idea that our country used to be great and very important and lead the world (symbolised by the Queen/King).

I'm not sure about having a monarchy tbh. On the one hand, it really helps to keep the class system in place and that is very bad. On the other hand, I like the soft power they exert - having someone free from political winds can be helpful in that sense, and I like the sense of history which comes with keeping them.

However, I think the usual arguments are silly. Firstly, the "cost" thing. 17p per person in the UK is negligible. Not worth kicking up a fuss imo. And the weekly meeting with the PM - the monarch is the only person in the world that the PM can be 100% sure won't discuss the conversation with the media. I can see how that is hugely beneficial to the PM, and I imagine they ignore the monarch's opinions on political matters.

Overall, a slimmed down monarchy would probably be a good balance for now. Fewer people in receipt of state support and fewer engagements.

You know that there have been people saying that the monarchy is finished for literally HUNDREDS of years.

You aren't saying anything that hasn't been said before.

At one point we actually got rid of the monarchy. And then brought it back.

I don't think it's going anywhere soon, despite your own personal views op.

‘Doesn't anyone do history anymore? The church of England was formed by an adulterous man who happened to be king’

is that supposed to be an argument for or against these leeches??

YANBU

However, I think the usual arguments are silly. Firstly, the "cost" thing. 17p per person in the UK is negligible.

You're only saying this because the PR people have trained you to think of it in these terms, which I'm sure you don't apply to anything else that requires public money. Well done to the PR guys, they are good at their job.

It's probably about 200 million if you take into account the SG, all the Duchies and the direct tax payer money used for security. That's not even taking into consideration money that could be realised from all the royal estates, the artwork, antiques and the 7 billion quid jewellery collection. Or the tax on private money they don't pay.

Its very far from negligible, at least try to make the PR's job challenging for them.

is that supposed to be an argument for or against these leeches??

😂

‘However, I think the usual arguments are silly. Firstly, the "cost" thing. 17p per person in the UK is negligible.’

sorry, what now? Have you actually sat down and done the suns or are you regurgitating some twaddle from the Monarchy marketing department?

TBH, even if it was 17p I begrudge giving multi millionaires a single penny.

and the cost isn’t why we need to get their paws off our politics anyway. What modern, democratic ( or so we claim) country should have an UNELECTED hereditary man as head of state?

Then I saw how much joy they bring to some people and who am I to say that should be eradicated?

If people derive joy from an entertaining soap opera focusing on extreme privilege and heredity, they could simply find a retro channel and watch a re-run of Dynasty. It's a sight cheaper (cost, incidentally, is the least of my objections to our current anachronistic, unfit-for-purpose system). It's a sight more democratic (that's a lot more important).

Best of all, they don't get to foist their choice of banal entertainment on the rest of the country.