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/

I think it’s reasonable to suggest that no land owners, whether they live in the UK or not, whether royal or not, should be permitted to hide their assets and avoid tax by registering their companies in off shore havens like Guernsey and Jersey, as described in that article. It’s completely immoral

It’s perfectly reasonable to suggest that happen but unreasonable to expect it to actually happen.

The Honours, the Lords, the monarchy - it all needs to go!

The class system will still be there.

@SuziQuinto

I see you know little about the United States separation of power.
It’s separated into three separate, but equal branches as set forth by our Constitution:
The Legislative (makes the laws)
The Executive (carries out the laws)
The Judicial (interprets the laws)

No president (The Executive) has any more power than the Legislators or the Judiciary.

Yes perhaps it’s unreasonable to expect it to happen but it is something concrete that we can campaign for and work towards. I don’t understand why everyone isn’t subjected to the same tax laws and the monarchy behaving as it does in this area, to a great extent, legitimises inequality.

So we just suck it up and accept our lot? How bloody depressing 🙄

@Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar

@Roussette is not your student. You are not her teacher and this is not a pop quiz.
She - nor anyone else - has to jump up and answer your questions simply because you demand them.
I saw a link to Republic upthread. Read that.

So we just suck it up and accept our lot? How bloody depressing 🙄

I didn’t say we just suck it up and accept our lot, just that shafting the monarchy may not bring the benefits that some quarters would have you believe.

Good for you( I mean that sincerely!) it takes a lot of guts to go against the grain!
I'm almost 50 , wasn't fussed before but now I too like the royal family ( I'm typical U.K. , love An underdog!)
The history is fascinating and it's something we as a country are known for! And after the brexit shite we should not be so keen to throw away our heritage that spans almost s thousand years!

How many times are people going to say "report me" etc on this thread? It's like a childish nah nah nah nah used when they can't make a sensible reply?

The history of colonisation and slavery casts a long shadow, especially given my family's involvement in major slave trading enterprises and their accumulation of wealth largely through these means and the exploitation of resources from colonised territories.

While the genealogical aspects and titles within the family history are of some interest, my appreciation largely ends there. Given the choice, I would prefer the abolition of the monarchy for these reasons, as well as the disparities in legal and financial obligations the of the population has to face.
The royal family enjoys exemptions from inheritance tax and possibly other taxes, and they operate under different legal standards than the general populace, including the ability to conceal wealth transfers i.e. inheritance . If I had a bag of £4mil in cash I would surely have to answer to someone.

https://www.republic.org.uk/donation

Interesting research paper that looks at the demographics of Mumsnet. It notes
'Nonetheless, Mumsnet census data report that the majority of its users are middle-class, university-educated women, and 74% of users have a household income of over the national average'

I have also read that the typical MN user is ageing. The average user is now forties heading to fifties with older children.
I don't think MN users represent young people in their teens and twenties.

Yes, I get the impression that many MN users signed up 15-20 ish years ago when they were pregnant or their kids were small, and stayed.

I wonder how many pregnant 25 year olds today would think, “I’ll sign up to Mumsnet”. Depends on what other resources are available I suppose.

Sorry if it has already been covered in this thread but to look only at youngsters engagement with the royal family is misleading if you do not compare it with their engagement with other institutions. They are far less likely to vote and engage with politics. They are far more likely to be unemployed or have experienced unemployment.

committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/48776/html/

Young people are so much more likely to be disengaged with public institutions. There is so much research out there showing lack of involvement with all established institutions. The Royal Family is of little interest to youngsters but so is government, traditional employment avenues etc etc. In many ways the real issue is to find ways to encourage young people to vote in elections. There is so much that is irrelevant to them. Home ownership, traditional careers, traditional sources of news and information.
But some Mumsnet posters would rather focus on gossip about the Royal Family rather than truly engaging with the needs of young people today who are more disaffected than ever before.

When I was younger, I had no time for them but was neutral. Now, a lot older, it does make me happy to see certain members of the RF doing well, getting on with their work, etc.

But I already know what Republic say. I am interested in what individual and prolific posters actually do. Is there any action that accompanies their talk? They can’t or won’t answer, and that in itself tells me a lot. No “pop quiz” needed.

I am interested in what individual and prolific posters actually do

Yeah right. Sure you are.

we should not be so keen to throw away our heritage that spans almost s thousand years!

I haven't seen any post suggesting this?

Indeed, I would say that if you consider the intersection of parent demographic, education level and interest in RF issues, it's highly unlikely there are many posters aged 18-24yrs on these RF boards specifically.

Thanks for this.

Given the YouGov stats, ensuring the age groups least supportive of the status quo (i.e. the under 25s, and to a lesser degree the 26-50s), are also the least likely to vote or to actively advocate for change has got to be central to the RF's strategy.

As you say, the group is already historically disengaged and otherwise preoccupied. And the new UK voter-ID laws which, to many in that group feel like voter-suppression tactics imported from the US, could make it even more difficult for younger citizens with views to have them heard. The under 30s should be a critical group to inform and mobilise if anything is to change.

On the flip side, maintaining support for the RF among the 50yrs+ groups is critical, and with the polling numbers also showing erosion of support in this group, the information and mobilisation effort would need to target this group too.

Many of the facts about the RF's role in the government of the UK, the exemptions they have secured to protect their wealth and status over generations, and of course their finances, have been touched upon here. There have been articles from investigative journalists (eg at the Guardian) and campaigners (eg at Republic), books such as Norman Baker's And What Do You Do?, etc.

Is the message cutting through? Maybe this needs a Netflix style docuseries...

You're right, @Brabican ; instead of a discussion it's just the awful gossip, currently slagging off Kate and William. Nasty and futile.

Oopsy daisy!!
There’s something I need to look for behind my sofa, I may be some time.😂😂

honestly no.
I think we in a country are generally quite apathetic about most things.
And when people do make the effort to protest very little changes (see the Iraq war) etc.
The only way we will change the status quo on something like the RF is either by enough people making a huge fuss, going on protests, etc. that they voluntarily abdicate to keep the peace, which I think is incredibly unlikely.
Or we vote in an anti-monarchist government who gives the option for a referendum on keeping the RF. I think if there was a referendum even now, let alone after concentrated campaigning, a fair percentage of people would vote against them, although not sure if it would be over 50%. However I think it's very unlikely any of the current parties would be interested in pushing that agenda.
So just don't think it's very likely that we will get rid of them any time in the near future.

You're right, @easylikeasundaymorn , I'm not sure that there would be a convincing majority in support. These threads are not necessarily representative, but people who seem to identify as being republican are very supportive of Meghan and Harry. So I wonder if it's less a monarchy, more the current personnel that people don't like?

I agree that people are generally apathetic or maybe too preoccupied by CoL crisis or how to pay the mortgage as well as afford their child’s school trip to care about the be RF , but, at the same time, I am quite heartened by all the new posters with Republican views posting on recent threads that the recent KP PR crisis has provoked. It shows that there are many more out of them out there than one might judge from reading the RF threads on here in “ordinary” times.