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?

Gosh, those who are in favour of the monarchy are being very rude on this thread.

”It’s here to stay”, “don’t cry too much now”, “you opinion doesn’t count”. And that’s just the first page. What ever happened to respectful discussion?

I think Instagram covers a lot of the Royals utility. If you want to see people leading much more luxurious lives than your own, titting about in designer clothes, struggling to be both aspirational and relatable at the same time, playing the gallery for 'likes'.

It's a much better platform.

But it doesn’t look like you’ve been brainwashed by ‘a fawning media and the glorified concept of a monarchy’ @theworldhas so why would anyone else be?

Do tell us what made you so enlightened that has passed the 60% by?

Notes:
i will hazard a guess that here you’ll say something along the lines of:

not believing every thing you read in the media
doing your own research
daily mail blah blah blah
a wide range of resources

‘Currently, according to polls over the last few years, about 60% are in favour of keeping it 20% opposed and 20% unsure.’

who’s running these polls? The royal PR team? And what does ‘keeping it’ mean?
if they want to stay relevant- they need to get their noses out of our democracy.

how about polls that asked questions about whether or not a man born into extreme privilege should have any right to influence U.K. politics just because of who his mum
was?

‘Don't knock what you don't understand!’

I do though, maybe that’s the problem. We’d be doing that little boy a favour by making sure the ‘king’ is nothing more than a ceremonial figurehead by the time his turn comes around.

I think the issue with recent polls is that people voting in them aren't necessarily distinguishing between 'being in favour of monarchy' and 'having Elizabeth Windsor as head of state'. Then there's obviously a bounce immediately after her death.

It will be more clear how many are genuinely monarchists in the next 3-5 years. I'll be interested to see what comes out then

Yabu

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.

Tax payers would still have to pay for security if we abolished the monarchy, though the amount would dwindle over time as they became less relevant. £200 million (though I'd argue you are also biased so I why should I trust your sources) is less than £3 per person. Still not significant imo.

As for the money "realised" from royal estates, I presume you mean sold? I definitely wouldn't want that! Our cultural heritage in the hands of private owners isn't something I could get behind. I much prefer to keep them where they are and use the revenue from tourists as an ongoing source of income for the country, regardless whether the monarch or the state were the official owner.

I agree with taxing their private wealth, though.

Tax payers would still have to pay for security if we abolished the monarchy, though the amount would dwindle over time as they became less relevant.

Youd still be quids in on the SG and the Duchies, which are worth more than 150 million. Lol at that being insignificant.

As for the money "realised" from royal estates, I presume you mean sold?

Not necessarily. Money could be made from greater tourist access, lending to other institutions or individuals. All kinds of options

Telling, isn't it!

17p per person is negligible to the individual yes but the sum of it could be used in much more worthy and powerful ways. I'd be happier if it went directly to solving societal issues, NHS trusts, sheltering homeless, rescuing neglected animals, heck, even filling some potholes.

Yes the hereditary millionaire family run their own charities but so do many other people - it's not enough for me to feel they are doing anything special.

‘Gosh, those who are in favour of the monarchy are being very rude on this thread.

”It’s here to stay”, “don’t cry too much now”, “you opinion doesn’t count”. And that’s just the first page. What ever happened to respectful discussion?’

smacks of desperation- that’s what happens when people see a change coming and fear what might happen.
there’s not the respect or reverence for Charlie that there was for the Queen. Why would there be? A man so out of touch with the real world.

As a firm fence sitter, neither side is coming off as being particularly pleasant.

‘Tax payers would still have to pay for security if we abolished the monarchy, though the amount would dwindle over time as they became less relevant.’

so? We pay for security for many exPMs and politicians.
it’s not about the money for me, although it would be nice not to give multi millionaires tax money, tax breaks and let them dodge paying inheritance tax too.
it’s the fact that a modern democracy allows a unelected, not that bright, toff so much political power and influence.

I don’t think that’s right. Most polls show overall support atm

But also I don’t think the republican side is being particularly pleasant

I can see the arguments both ways, but am just on side of keeping

I think that the RF will survive but in a weakened state.
I think that more royal secrets will emerge which will have an adverse effect on the RF.
All the alleged racism, adultery and dealings with nefarious individuals has not done the royals any favours.
Furthermore, some members of the RF have made a Faustian Pact with some from the right wing media with information being given to journalists in exchange for favourable headlines.
All a bit if a mess

Sad but true

Tax payers would still have to pay for security if we abolished the monarchy, though the amount would dwindle over time as they became less relevant.

Why though? Harry and Meghan are still members of the "Royal Family", working or not, and didn't they get refused security at the taxpayers expense? Wasn't there a court case about it - although I have no idea about whatthe outcome was as I wasn't paying much attention. Monarchs in other countries that have abolished the monarchy - in other words, not monarchs at all - have to pay for security if they want it.

If they are no longer monarchs but private, albeit still filthy rich, citizens then they are actually of little value as "targets" anyway. And they could then choose to live wherever they want, and may decide on somewhere with a nicer clime anyway.

Polls! Please. They poll during times like the jubilee, asking people
on the streets who are out celebrating the jubilee if they support the monarchy… or if the Queen did a good job.
try asking people if they think it’s about time the monarch list the power to sign acts of Parliament into law and have the power of veto taken away and you’d probably get very different answers.

It will probably start with Commonwealth countries getting rid of charlie boy as head of state. As they probably should given how many of them are former colonies.

or maybe it’ll all kick off with one big royal scandal, god only knows that family has a few skeletons in the closet. From paedophiles to nazi sympathisers to hiding away disabled offspring and back again.

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

We are currently talking about the British and their empire so we are specifically talking about them. If we were discussing the abolition of the Belgian monarchy i would be very much talking about reparations for what happened in the Congo. (it is a discussion, FWIW, currently going on in Germany) [about German colonies, just to be clear because i know pedants would be jumping all over me for that]

The John Oliver link i posted covers the Mau Mau uprising, btw, and is very interesting since it is in living memory and victims are still alive and waiting for promised compensation.

I'm patiently waiting to see if Charles is really going to slim down the monarchy. In his shoes? I would:

• any of them over 65 would be immediately pensioned off. They may stay in their G&F apartments but if they own other properties, they must decamp to those
• any of them over 55 would be given a small stipend so they don't fall off a cliff, but they would be expected to earn their own keep until retirement age (the after dinner talk circuit is lucrative, as is the Jungle thing, Strictly, Sewing Bee etc...) G&F apartments would be restricted to the next 3 years after that commercial rent or purchase their own place
• any between 30 and 55 would be given help to train/re-train to do something in order for them to earn money. I anticipate it to be something like art galleries, charity sector, or PR or whatever. Their money from the civil list would be tapered off according to age/circs (kids etc). G&F apartments would be restricted to the next 12 months after that commercial rent or purchase their own place
• the younger ones are to be cut loose from the civil list and expected to earn a living and find somewhere to live.

The actual monarchy to be restricted to King/Queen (& spouse) Heir (% spouse & offspring). the expectation being that as long as they receive civil list money, they perform their official duties. These could be outsourced to minor royals on a pay-as-you-go basis (so in effect using them as freelancers). The younger children expected to study and work hard to establish their own career.

No royal yachts, trains planes or whatever. If they can afford a chauffer driven roller, fine, I would expect them to travel first class on trains, and flights over 4 hours. Business class for the rest. I'm all for opening up Buck House as a museum and/or archive, centre of excellence for training tradespeople on the maintenance and upkeep of old houses. Ditto Castles etc. Clothing and travel allowance to apply, entertainment budget etc etc

Private residences - fine. But they have to pay for all due taxes and upkeep. IHT to apply as it does to everyone else, other taxes the same.

And i expect there to be robust and correct discussions on abolishing the monarchy after Charles. At a push after William.

Well you’re not going to get the answer you want. There’s not much point in talking about it if it’s I don’t want to hear others want to keep the monarchy.

I doubt you’ll see what you’re after

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

can’t beat a bit of whataboutery!

can you imagine if the Germans carried on like that every time someone mentioned the Nazis? Instead they’ve, mostly, come to terms with their shameful past and educate their children about it.
unlike the English who start pointing fingers a Spain or the Dutch when someone brings up their shameful colonial past.
it’s okay to teach British children what really happened. They understand that no one is trying to hold them personally responsible for it.

Oh come on. The whole world has history of treating other people appallingly. It’s not unique to the British or even Europeans.
We’re an awful, selfish, violent, greedy species. We historically did what we could get a away with. Some still do.

@MarshaBradyo it’s a classic argument for shutting down a conversation, isn’t it? You won’t find your answers here, so go away. I disagree with you - so go away. I’m not listening so stop talking…
not so clear cut though, there’s quite a few people on here who don’t think the monarchy should continue in as it is.
And once the Queen becomes more of a memory, I think there wi be even more.
it is possible to have respect for a person, while also thinking it time to downgrade the institution she was apart of.

No you are not keen on listening.Polls - nooo not that they don’t reflect my view polls don’t count, and so on. Yabu in the vote above

Anyway it’s pointless. You can keep talking all you want but if it’s only to get the same message back it’s just one sided. You won’t see the change just by talking over anyone who thinks differently to you.

I’m not ‘shutting you down’ just giving another pov as unwelcome as you are finding it.