Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

Do you understand what a constitutional monarchy means?

82 replies

ShrikeAttack · 09/03/2021 02:01

Do you?

I'm not sure many people actually understand what it means in terms of the UK and its political system.

I'm pretty sure why thats why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are coming unstuck.

It's a social contract. The Royal Family can't really say or do anything. They are an unelected head of state who have to adhere to the rules, as stated.

They have all the pomp and ceremony, but they never had much choice.

They present the country.

OP posts:
Pyewackect · 09/03/2021 02:11

I worked in the US for a number of years and altho I love my time there it made me laugh at the number of Americans who honestly believed the monarchy held executive power over parliament !.

Original poster
ShrikeAttack · 09/03/2021 02:31

Quite!

I lived in the US too.

I don't necessarily agree, it's not really whether I agree or not though.

It's a constitutional head of state, combined with an elected PM.

It's not really up to an American actress to 'speak her truth' to modernise a 1500 year old, quite successful institution. The British RF, lead by the Queen, generally stfu.

They've stfu since Cromwell really and Charles the second.

OP posts:
EmiliaAirheart · 09/03/2021 02:41

Except they don’t just sit back and stfu. Maybe publicly. Kind of a low bar for an otherwise democratic society, but then again, maybe you’re happy with getting the odd street party and royal memorabilia in exchange?
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/08/queen-power-british-law-queens-consent

floweryscarf · 09/03/2021 02:45

No. Can you explain it?

Original poster
ShrikeAttack · 09/03/2021 03:11

I'd much rather have a monarchy than an elected ruling class. An elected ruling class is venal. A ruling class by birth is quiet, it's just what they do. The Queen does what she does.

OP posts:
RickiTarr · 09/03/2021 03:18

Oprah clearly doesn’t have the first clue.

I found that irritating from a journalist, and usually I quite like her stuff, but it was like she hadn’t done her homework.

Original poster
ShrikeAttack · 09/03/2021 03:30

Yeah @RickiTarr, there was no 'background'.

Poor.

Man. Our mixed race background is cool. I think.

OP posts:
Mialain · 09/03/2021 03:36

They actually do, i was listening to a podcast recently on this topic, one journalist did an investigation into one of the laws that requires queens oversight when it pertains her property or estate. It was previously thought to have been just a ceremonial act, but he dug into now unclassified files, and found she had intervened in thousands of laws, one of the main ones was that she would did not want to disclose her financial assets in the stock-markets, so yes the Americans are right to some extend.....😂😂

Mialain · 09/03/2021 03:39

@Pyewackect

I worked in the US for a number of years and altho I love my time there it made me laugh at the number of Americans who honestly believed the monarchy held executive power over parliament !.
They actually do, i was listening to a podcast recently on this topic, one journalist did an investigation into one of the laws that requires queens oversight when it pertains her property or estate. It was previously thought to have been just a ceremonial act, but he dug into now unclassified files, and found she had intervened in thousands of laws, one of the main ones was that she would did not want to disclose her financial assets in the stock-markets, so yes the Americans are right to some extend.....( just figured out how to reply on this thing 😂😂)
aweegc · 09/03/2021 03:43

But Oprah isn't doing this for facts. If this interview wasn't sensational, if she made the couple look like they were complaining about things they'd misunderstood (btw I'm not saying they did misunderstand everything, but it would appear some things they did, like their "first" marriage and how titles work what with H not being in direct line to the throne like his brother) then it wouldn't have made such huge headlines.

She wasn't there to be a journalist. She was there as a TV presenter with a company set to make millions at least. If it had been an actual journalist with actual journalistic credibility, the interview would never have happened. The couple have a business to build up too. There's a reason they didn't go with Andrew Marr for example!

Hmm..that would have been an interesting interview!!

DarkMutterings · 09/03/2021 03:58

She wasn't there to be a journalist. She was there as a TV presenter with a company set to make millions at least. If it had been an actual journalist with actual journalistic credibility, the interview would never have happened. The couple have a business to build up too. There's a reason they didn't go with Andrew Marr for example!

This ...

We're all debating the minutiae of RF vs H&M when I think Oprah and the money making machine of TV is possibly a far more interesting debate.

BasiliskStare · 09/03/2021 04:18

So - just e.g. - complaining your son isn't a Prince when there is no constitutional way he can be ( at the moment ) - well surely Harry should have known that , Archie has not been discriminated against, compared to e.g. William's children. It is the way it works. Like it or not & many don't - but them's the rules

floweryscarf · 09/03/2021 05:07

Oprah gave a platform for an inside view of the Royal Family.

SmokedDuck · 09/03/2021 05:26

I do, but I would say that here in Canada many people don't. They realise the Queen doesn't run the government but they don't understand much beyond that.

It's not just the role of the monarch though, they don't really understand how the government works generally, how bills are created, what the purpose of the upper house is, committee work, etc.

It's a bit scary actually, lots of people have ideas about what should be changed but they can't describe how it is supposed to work now.

BasiliskStare · 09/03/2021 06:08

@floweryscarf I think Oprah gave a platform for one particular inside view of the Royal family.

Silurian · 09/03/2021 06:12

@ShrikeAttack

I'd much rather have a monarchy than an elected ruling class. An elected ruling class is venal. A ruling class by birth is quiet, it's just what they do. The Queen does what she does.
What do you mean, ‘an elected ruling class’? Most countries with an elected ceremonial HoS elect an individual for a term, after which he or she goes on to other work or retires, and another unrelated individual is elected.
aweegc · 09/03/2021 06:31

[quote BasiliskStare]**@floweryscarf* I think Oprah gave a platform for one particular* inside view of the Royal family.[/quote]
Totally agree.

I thought what Samantha Markle did before the wedding was utterly horrific.

What H&M, but mainly H as it's his family, have done is worse.

I see Samantha Markle is back. And why not? Her whole family can do interviews about her. Meghan can't claim to be a victim if people tell their truth about how she's made them feel. Same with any friends who feel they've been treated unfairly or hurt by her. Of course, they won't have Oprah to give it so much air. However, the fact that H&M have opened this up with Oprah means they've given it air.

But to the original point. It's blatantly clear that Americans have no idea what a constitutional monarchy is. All they (on average) know about monarchy comes from Disney, or whoever else makes those teen movies about a regular girl working in a bar falling in love with a handsome stranger who turns out to be a European prince. They get engaged and she has to get some new dresses and learn how to ride. Most Americans couldn't pinpoint the U.K. on a world map. The US educational system is heavy on US history and geography, but not outside its borders.

joystir59 · 09/03/2021 06:53

Watching this interview appeals to the same bit of me that loves The Crown. But I haven't watched it and probably won't.

Kinsters · 09/03/2021 06:54

Yes, they see how the system is unfair to them but not how it is unfair to everyone. Like when Meghan said it would be great for the royal family to have her representing them because the commonwealth want to see "people who look like them". But then why wouldn't the commonwealth countries choose one of their own citizens for the job?

Same with the press. They are kept in their position because of the support of the public and press. But they don't want to be accountable to the press..

ChameleonClara · 09/03/2021 06:55

Yes I do understand.

I would prefer democracy.

Original poster
ShrikeAttack · 09/03/2021 07:21

But the UK has a democracy, with a constitutional monarchy as the head of state.

I think it's a very reasonable state of affairs.

The deal is that they shut up and put up, whilst being kept in nice circumstances. The Queen understands this, she's been in the job for nearly 70 years.

OP posts:
ChameleonClara · 09/03/2021 07:37

@ShrikeAttack

But the UK has a democracy, with a constitutional monarchy as the head of state.

I think it's a very reasonable state of affairs.

The deal is that they shut up and put up, whilst being kept in nice circumstances. The Queen understands this, she's been in the job for nearly 70 years.

That's nice you think that.

I would prefer a full democracy. It's not a niche POV.

wanderings · 09/03/2021 07:45

I am in favour of the vaccines, but I bet it wasn’t Her Majesty’s choice to give that little spiel about how one must be vaccinated. The government are her (and our) servants, not the other way round.

chomalungma · 09/03/2021 07:49

@ShrikeAttack

But the UK has a democracy, with a constitutional monarchy as the head of state.

I think it's a very reasonable state of affairs.

The deal is that they shut up and put up, whilst being kept in nice circumstances. The Queen understands this, she's been in the job for nearly 70 years.

We shouldn't have a Queen.

Many countries seem to cope with an elected President who has powers of a Head of State with similar powers to the Queen.

Do you understand everything about the Constitutional Monarchy?

Why do many modern democracies have an elected Head of State instead of a Head of State who is there because of birthright?

Goldenbear · 09/03/2021 07:51

Yes and it's why Britain is seemingly 'obsessed' with class and where people fit in to that system! You get the impression on here that when this is discussed on Mumsnet, its relevance is not understood or how this still impacts on people's lives.