REUTERS: Only a minority of Britons under 50 support the monarchy

[TallerSally]

The chart below, along with the unprecedented level of social media (and even royalty!) mocking around Katespiracy and Katephotogate, could send a chill down the RF's spine.

Whilst 70% of those aged 65+ and 50% of the 50-64 (the demographic on MN?) support the monarchy, this drops to 30% among the 25-49 and ONLY 19% among the 18-24s - YouGov Jan 24 data.

Some will say "that's nowt new!" But with TikTok, X and other SM having unprecedented reach (far more than mainstream media) and cultivating literally thousands of GenZ and Millennial mini-influencers, and with the RF in its current state of turmoil (some of it illness-related, some not, incl. Prince William being largely MIA, the RF's reluctance to deal with Prince Andrew and his grifting ex-wife, Rose Hanbury and extra child (!!) rumours, the casting-out and continued vilification of M&H, the embarrassment that is uncle Gary, etc etc), are comparisons to a decade ago going to be helpful in predicting what this means for the RF in the future? I doubt it.

We all know the billionaire RF continue to sustain their taxpayer and IHT exemption-funded luxury lives thanks to the public's goodwill, hence they employ loads of professional PR people to do their comms. But if there's anything recent events have shown, KP in particular suck at it, with the KP comms team the subject of derision and ridicule around the globe.

It's easy to say "they've weathered worse", but the past isn't a guarantor of the future. I'm sure Boris Johnson also thought he could lie to the public forever... until one day, the tide turned. Not saying this is an identical situation, but the recent lies emanating from KP (I'm sorry, issuing a fake 'proof of life' photo is equivalent to telling a lie) are part of a culture of secrecy and public manipulation.

And consider this: last August, the above numbers were:
80% of those aged 65+ and 67% of the 50-64s support the monarchy, versus 56% among the 25-49s and 37% among the 18-24s. So a drop of 26pp (percentage points) for the 25-49s, and 18pp for the 18-24s.

And who's to say what the numbers will be post-Katephotogate?

https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/uk-monarchy-suffers-an-impairment-its-goodwill-2024-03-13/

@SuziQuinto heads of state are not supposed to have power.

Tell that to Joe Biden.
Or Emanuel Macron.

I think we are one of those points in history where it is very hard to predict what anything will be like in 20 years time. This doesn't just apply to attitudes to the monarchy though. A lot of the building blocks we have taken for granted since the second world war are either no longer there or are creaking. The NHS, Europe, the caliber of politicians, pensions, house ownership, out international standing and influence etc etc many things that older people took for granted are going to look vastly different for younger generations.

The monarchy, by which I mean the institution rather than individuals, is only one part of the way our country is structured and it's the part that has survived the longest. Interesting times ahead and lots of changes I am sure but I'm not willing to bet against them just yet. If nothing else the monarchy has proven it can ride out a storm and adapt to changing circumstances.

@SuziQuinto their power is not because they are heads of state. I was responding to the comment that the powers need to be separated.

In my opinion they do. Looking at history, if you combine the two roles the person has too much power imo. Split it, and there are more checks and balances.

I hope we phase them out gracefully over the next few decades. The monarchy is an anachronism and in the days of mass media, the frequent scandals are just embarrassing. I expect that if we do become a republic, some of the younger royals will be mighty relieved.

What damage?

You deliberately copy and pasted just part of my post to try and make a point leaving out the essential bit where I corrected myself.

Makes you look like you are deliberately making stuff up to have a go at me

But even with the youngest cohort there's only a 50% for elected head of state.
those 'don't know's cover a huge proportion.
'Support' is too vague a term.
From an idealistic point of view I don't like the idea of a monarchy but I'm not about to go and protest about it.
I think the majority of people don't care enough either way to force any sort of major change, so they'll probably just shuffle on for at least a few more generations. If they do streamline a bit so that there aren't so many hangers on in subsidised housing, that would be great.

Also the problem with an 'elected head of state' is it would just be one person. In the same way as Rishi Sunak's wife, sister, and aunt aren't patrons of charities or go around opening supermarkets 1 elected head of state isn't going to be filling in all the gaps that the extended RF does. You might argue we don't need any of that stuff but enough people seem to appreciate it.

Also we don't exactly have a great record of electing wonderful representatives, do we? There are lots of countries where there's overlap between head of state and head of government - I'd rather have Prince Charles representing the UK than Liz Truss!

@MrsLeonFarrell If nothing else the monarchy has proven it can ride out a storm and adapt to changing circumstances.

I agree so far, but a key question the current debacle raises is whether it is adapting to changing circumstances?

Arguably, officially putting out a fake photo to news agencies was a major misstep suggesting a fundamental miscalculation around how the photo was going to be received.

And despite a clamour for KP to release the real original, they are refusing to, fuelling even more damaging rumours, and derision. Is this a sign of adaptation?

I think every crisis can be seen as a 'teaching moment' - I wonder what the royal palaces are learning from it? if anything...

(hint: people are not stupid, and as bankrollers of the RF they are not to be taken for granted)

@easylikeasundaymorn I think the majority of people don't care enough either way to force any sort of major change

... could this be the result of the total opacity the RF maintain around, for example, their finances? which has led to investigative journalists (eg at the Guardian) spending years trying to work out how much they cost the public, what their net worth is and how much money they're making?

If people knew the full facts, would they continue not caring, particularly as they contemplate their, shall we say, more financially-challenged livers?

Love it!

Ive been here nearly 20 years... and you?!!
I am quite comfortable in my own skin here so please do not worry 🤭👍

I have a strong sense that the UK would have a chance to be a better country without the shackles of a monarchy holding it back. I am not talking about individual members of the RF particularly here, but I don’t think the institution any longer represents the values that it purports to encourage. The entire scaffolding of state needs a good shake up imho because we trusted the establishment and the establishment has let us down.

I naively thought that the British establishment was about service and it turns out that it represents corruption, nepotism and personal greed.

In the 60s, and again briefly in the 90s, there was a glimmer of hope that class and “who you know” and privilege based on birth would no longer matter, and there would be a chance for a more equal meritocracy to thrive. Sadly, we now seem to have fallen back in to an even worse position than before. Those of us who have worked hard and followed the rules have been shafted by those who lack any form of vision or moral compass beyond making a quick buck for themselves.

The British Riyal family embeds privilege in the heart of our society and, put simply, I no longer think it is appropriate in the 21st century to visit homeless shelters while living in a castle.

Genuine question, what is your reason for hating the monarchy as an institution? Is it the inherited privilege of being born to be HOS, the money they get from the government? There are a lot of republicans on here so I would be interested to hear your reasonings or other republicans on here.

@Artapplicapplications787

That is a really great post, you put the case so well.

I used to be quite the royalist believe it or not.
And it was a slow drip drip over decades of royal related happenings that I felt quite uncomfortable about, that changed my view totally, as I looked into what I could and came up wanting more
The smoke and mirrors and opacity is really too much

I'm a crusty old fart , according to the
Survey , but I'm fed up of the shenanigans with royalty .
Utterly pissed off that H&M can't just live the private life that they want yet seem to need the trappings of royalty.
Fed up of the whole of the House of Windsor. Fed up with the vast amounts of taxpayers' money that's thrown their way . The pomp is so dated and seems to enforce the 'we are royal, therefore better than you' idea.

They own so many properties and land, much of it bought with our money but is , apparently, personally owned by them.
George IV almost bankrupted the country so where did Victorias vast wealth come from? It wasn't from Albert as his family were all but broke.

Where the hell did the vast Royal Collection that none of us can see other than a few pieces on an expensive tour of Buckingham Palace come from?
Please let's force them to be like European royals.

And to those who say 'look how much tourism they bring' just look at the Palace of Versailles which brings in so much more tourist money.

Interesting points @Artapplicapplications787 Would like to debate this but have a pub quiz to attend tonight, hopefully this discussion will continue.

What exactly are all you fed up people doing about it? Are you actually doing any work on the ground to further the cause of republicanism?