Abolishing the Monarchy

[tigger2022]

A few people on different sides of the debate have expressed an interest in discussing/debating this, so I thought we could give it a go…

Abolishing the monarchy?

My personal view: I used to be a staunch republican but have since completely changed my view. I think the constitutional monarchy is a slightly odd system, but seems to do the job, and I can’t think of another country’s system which is actually preferable. I also find myself less & less convinced by republican arguments…

Thoughts?

I think there might be a reason you’ve heard the current constitutional status of the UK before other than blah blah blah 😂

In order to discuss whether and how the UK constitution should be changed it’s perfectly reasonable to express what it currently IS. This is a nice civil thread so far let’s keep it that way!

The purpose of the HOL is supposed to be advisory, so I think there should be a more collaborative way that Lords are nominated. Eg if both the PM and the OL had to agree. I’m sure there would still be some party-political deals going on but on the whole I think a higher calibre & less controversial set of individuals would be elevated to the Lords. There is too much of party political shenanigans right now.

So I am just reading further about what the monarchs legal immunity means. Not only can the monarch not be prosecuted for crime, in fact it is not a crime if carried about by him. Jfc. Imagine that. You could literally get away with anything.

But Charles 1st WAS tried for the crime of Treason and WAS executed for it!

KC IS being investigated for a crime though right?

just seen the post before my last one… I think we’ve narrowed the problem down to the charleses

Princess Anne was prosecuted for having an out of control dog and was found guilty.

an investigation ongoing since 2021 and nobody is commenting on it... I don;t think it is happening at all. After all, it can't be a crime if he does it.

she's not the monarch, it only applies to them.

Investigation into whom and for what?

So how come Charles 1 was tried and executed for his crime???

@BMW6 I believe because Charles I was executed either before or during the civil war and then Cromwell came along. I'm not overly familiar with that chapter of English history.

No, Cromwell was instrumental in prosecuting the King and Charles was executed at the end of the Civil War.

I am familiar with it. I am stating that the assertion that Monarchs are exempt from prosecution is not true.

In fact IIRC Parliament created the law with which to prosecute him!

@BMW6 True. They're not. I think the infraction has to be something very serious, like treason. Like say, you can't prosecute Charles III for speeding, although that's partly because he doesn't need a driving licence.

Abolish TOXIC CELEBRITY CULTURE aggrandize and nurtured by the media!
We can just about put up with the Royals, who are not perfect and go about their work and family matters heavily under a media microscope.

It is the Celebrity Culture heavily promoted wannabees by Daily Mail and the rest of tabloid newspapers - forcing their images everywhere. These wawnnabees have nothing to give, nothing to offer other than their plastic looks to further their "careers".
British are forever trying to ape these idiot celebrities because of their looks. The royal family in comparison are just another family.

@tigger2022

I think you’ve misunderstood me .
I meant ‘blah blah etc’ when people say the royals are just figureheads. I certainty wasn’t saying ‘ blah blah ‘ to you in particular
I used to hear that the ‘royals’ are mere figureheads - powerless - all the time - it has gone a bit quiet since the Guardian has been doing such good work uncovering their hidden ways
My point is the ‘royals’ use their position to further their own interests - not those of the people .
100s of laws which this mere ‘figurehead’ gets advisors to looks through and ensure that the monarch is excluded. As for the rest of us - we can go to hell.

That was my point .

I want to keep the monarchy because I don't want any of the republicans on here to be my president. They don't represent any of my values in life.

Imagine; President Blair. Because that's who I reckon it will be if ever there was a big enough push for a republic in the UK.

The second chamber exists to balance the HoC (or whatever new name it would have) It would debate and even introduce laws. Although, hopefully, it would carry on containing people who are experts in their field, PR or not, you'd have to elect people from an existing pool. Therefore candidates have to be named before the election can take place. Clearly those that are set up to do that are political parties. Plus those parties will want to have their own members in the house to get their legislation through.

I don't see how non political people would be voted in. Would there be a list somewhere they had to sign their name to? How would we know what their politics are as to inform us what financial and social bills they'll support. If its a PR system, who decides what order on the list these people will be?

I hope that the second chamber keeps it expertise, I guess I just dont see how politics, and therefore politicians, will be removed from it. But I'm interested to in being proved wrong.

that's shocking police can't enter the estates to investigate crime without the monarchs permission! They really are above the law!

While the royals have complied with police requests to investigate, it seems quite likely that the notice given has been used to obscure evidence of wildlife crimes taking place:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jul/15/sandringham-estate-police-barred-investigating-wildlife-crime

Imagine; President Blair. Because that's who I reckon it will be if ever there was a big enough push for a republic in the UK.

Imagine King Andrew.

Because but for an accident of birth order that's who we'd have been watching park arse on the throne last month.

I imagine if Prince Andrew wasn't a spare, he'd be a bit less noncey. In the same way that if Harry wasn't a spare, he'd be a bit less whiny.

The Monarchy is based on elitist principles and the British Royal Family cost far too much money.
All these - admittedly spectacular - events like the coronation etc feel also obscene in a country where working families are dependant on benefits.
And barely make do.
Tourists would still come without a Royal family. I very much enjoyed my visit to Versailles and didn't miss not seeing any French royal family...

And last not least - if Charles had died before he had kids, Andrew would now be King

I’ll try again:
@CathyorClaire are you doing anything to actively oust the Royal Family? As I said earlier, I thought the republican movement was going into action once the Queen died.
If the institution is so unpopular why isn’t Keir Starmer proposing its dissolution in Labour’s manifesto for the next election?