NationStates Jolt Archive

What I mean is are you proud to honor or pledge allegiance to her? Or do you wish she was not even their and you had no monarchy?

never i dont like her muahahahahahahaha jk idk im an american

What's...there to be proud of?

You have the symbol of British monarchy, a force that has thrown the world into quite a good number of wars for hundreds of years.

You have a really old lady who doesn't make a lot of appearances.

And you have a Prime Minister who can just act in the name of the Crown.

You just have a person just sitting there with all that power and isn't really doing much.

well If I was British I would honor her because she is a symbol of your country. For Queen and country. Monarchs bring people together! So who cares if she really does nothing! Thank goodness she is just their to support you! If she was head of the Gov. britian would be in the stone age!

I would never pledge allegience to her, or any head of state.

The monarchy is just there as a tourist attraction, and because it saves us the trouble of having to actually write a proper constitution.

The main trouble with having a monarch, is that it makes the prime-minster overly powerful, as he's come to adopt most of her powers.

I guess it send a pretty negative message about the equal worth of all individuals, but only if you take them seriously. And there are plenty of more pressing signs of ineqaulity about.

I guess the good thing is, that we don't feel proud of our ellected leaders. Where as some Americans will think that (for eg) voting against a President at a time of war shows a lack of loyalty, we couldn't care less.

well If I was British I would honor her because she is a symbol of your country. For Queen and country. Monarchs bring people together! So who cares if she really does nothing! Thank goodness she is just their to support you! If she was head of the Gov. britian would be in the stone age!

The British monarch or sovereign is the head of state of the United Kingdom and its overseas territories, and is the source of all executive, judicial and (as the Queen-in-Parliament) legislative power.

The monarchy is an anachronism and the hereditary principle in government does keep us in the stone age (politically speaking).

Well by my view I like the way they run your Gov.

Canadian, not British, but since she's my monarch too, I feel qualified to give my opinion: NO. Why should I be proud of a family that hasn't done a damn thing to deserve their money and power in the first place. Let the Americans have them, they seem to love them so much anyway.

The way the monarchy works in Britain is that the Queen has real power and gives it to those around her. It's like an apathetic Big Brother. Like 1984, we have this figure who represents the system which gives it a sense of authority and physicality, but in our case, she doesn't really worry about the whole thing. In that respect, I guess I am proud to honour her. I wouldn't pledge allegience though; she's just the person at the top of a potentially falliable system.

I prefer the apathetic Queen to the Gung-ho President, anyway.

Can anyone tell me what actual executive power the Queen still commands?

Does she actually have any power at all anymore, or is she a mere figurehead?

Can anyone tell me what actual executive power the Queen still commands?

Does she actually have any power at all anymore, or is she a mere figurehead?

All laws must be approved by the Queen before they can come into effect. She has the power to refuse to varify them, but if she ever does Parlaiment will immideately dissolve the monarchy.

She can also seize any land in the country for use of the state (i.e. your back garden).

She can also seize any land in the country for use of the state (i.e. your back garden).

Why would the state want my back garden? She already owns half the country property wise.

Why would the state want my back garden? She already owns half the country property wise.

Just an example

Why would the state want my back garden? She already owns half the country property wise.

She probably wouldn't want it, but she could if she did.

Now, Im hearing a lot of technical things that may be still used by the Crown, but nothing that that Crown, would actually do.

Is there any power the Queen has..that she can, has, and will use again?

All laws must be approved by the Queen before they can come into effect. She has the power to refuse to varify them, but if she ever does Parlaiment will immideately dissolve the monarchy.Parliament has no power to dissolve monarchy. Only the queen herself can choose to step down.

Parliament has no power to dissolve monarchy. Only the queen herself can choose to step down.


By what authority did Cromwell do it, way back when?

By what authority did Cromwell do it, way back when?Deposition by armed revolution.

... Okay, okay, no Diplomatic power to dissolve monarchy then. >_>

By what authority did Cromwell do it, way back when?

Bullets and swords....mostly. :)

No I dislike the monarchy...the faster it goes and England, Scotland and Wales go their seperate ways the happier I will be.

See now...if nothing else, Cromwell was a "take charge" kinda guy.

I kinda like that.

Too bad he turned out to be a dickhead though.

I heard he banned Christmas.

Canadian, not British, but since she's my monarch too, I feel qualified to give my opinion: NO. Why should I be proud of a family that hasn't done a damn thing to deserve their money and power in the first place. Let the Americans have them, they seem to love them so much anyway.


would you say no if some one came along and handed you shed loads of cash and power?

i actully have no real opinion on the queen or royal family but id rather have them then a president.

Royal Family has NO POWER.
The Queen has to acede to parliaments demands or a constitutional crisis will occur in a fight she cannot win. Merely a figurehead role.

She ain't my queen anyway. I am Welsh not British, she is simply the German Queen of the English settlers.

Now, Im hearing a lot of technical things that may be still used by the Crown, but nothing that that Crown, would actually do.

Is there any power the Queen has..that she can, has, and will use again?

The queen still appoints the governers of DEPENDENT commonwealth coutrys, well, colonys EG ST helena (yes, where napoleon was sent to exile)

Well, being British, yes i love the monarchy. Everyone who says the monarchy should go because they get loads of things they didnt work for, so what!?!?!? they were just lucky, should lottery winners have there money taken away?

Its a shame that, one of our greatest traditions may be gotten rid of because people are simply jealous.

Someone said the queen makes almost no public appearances, your an idiot, she does, a LOT. Ive seen her no less then 3 times, twice she happened to be in hyde park, just making a speech un announced, the other was at sheringham.
And, she does a LOT of charity fund raising, she's the guest speaker at a lot of venues.

I love britian, and the union (which i would fight to keep) and i love the monarchy.

Royal Family has NO POWER.
The Queen has to acede to parliaments demands or a constitutional crisis will occur in a fight she cannot win. Merely a figurehead role.

She ain't my queen anyway. I am Welsh not British, she is simply the German Queen of the English settlers.

She is your queen, like it or not. She's queen of Great Britiain and northern island, and the commonwealth.

Unless you succeed, which would NEVER happen, wales woudent last 5 minutes on its own.

To the criticism that the Royal Family is "anachronistic": This is the weakest, most pissy, and least relevant criticism that one could possibly make.

Political systems newer than the Westminster Constitutional Monarchy have had a terrible record (a few examples being Communism, Fascism, National Socialism).

Even democratic republics have had a worse time constitutionally than Her Majesty's realms, the United States, for example, where 9 black-robed Dictators can make whatever law they please without reference to anyone.

The Queen is a safeguard. And it works, splendidly.

Why change it? Whenever that question is asked, the answer comes down to "fashion".

I like the queen, its something that holds great Britain together. She doesnt do much political but does to plenty of things to help people aswell as bringing the old common wealth countrys together. I think the queen should stay

Royal Family has NO POWER.
The Queen has to acede to parliaments demands or a constitutional crisis will occur in a fight she cannot win. Merely a figurehead role.

She ain't my queen anyway. I am Welsh not British, she is simply the German Queen of the English settlers.

Its ok. Britain doesnt want you.

By what authority did Cromwell do it, way back when?

Because Cromwell was an evil bastard who murdered Catholics and banned Christmas. He had the King executed, after forcing parliament to sign his death warrent. When Charles II was placed on the throne, angry people dug up "the traitor" Cromwell's body and hung it on public display. I think this shows what people genuinely thought of the man...

Whether you like the royal family or not, Britain is NOT a patriotic country. I personally prefer to have them there, but the fact is that either Britain have stopped caring about patrioticism or there is too great a foreign influence on society to make people appreciate them. Either way, makes you wonder why they're still there.

Because Cromwell was an evil bastard who murdered Catholics and banned Christmas. He had the King executed, after forcing parliament to sign his death warrent. When Charles II was placed on the throne, angry people dug up "the traitor" Cromwell's body and hung it on public display. I think this shows what people genuinely thought of the man...


How did he force Parliament to sign the warrant?

I'm from New Zealand. I'm not proud of the Queen or anything but I don't see any pressing reason to get rid of the monarchy. The Governor General has to sign all legislation, but short of genocide would never actually refuse to do so. As Disraeliland said, it works as a safeguard.

We'd have some problems here if we became a Republic because of the Crown's treaty with the Maori people. Getting rid of the monarchy, or our ties to it, would nullify the treaty and we'd probably have a pretty ugly national debate over how we handle this in a constitution...

What's...there to be proud of?

You have the symbol of British monarchy, a force that has thrown the world into quite a good number of wars for hundreds of years.

You have a really old lady who doesn't make a lot of appearances.

And you have a Prime Minister who can just act in the name of the Crown.

You just have a person just sitting there with all that power and isn't really doing much.

It doesn't look as though any of this was adressed to you anyway, but as youve given your opinion, I only feel obliged to correct it. Your ideas seem a little warped. The queen is not required to "do anything" with the power afforded her as that is not how our country is run, quite simply. I certainly have far more pride in the Queen, than I do in our current prime minister. The Queen is a symbol of more than the British Monarchy, she is a symbol of a long and proud history of a nation that has been at the heart of the world for centuries, with a distiguished and ancient heritage. Naturally, I wouldn't expect YOU to understand this.
And as for the comment about starting lots of wars, I think you'll find that with something as old as the monarchy, there are many conflicts down the line. This is only natural. Look at the history of many nations and you will see the same. In fact, for a nation as young as your own, you have been in surprisingly many wars. Perhaps if any office was to receive the award for starting the most wars in recent years, it would be that of your president. Of course, you could always just invade us if you don't like it, it seems to be an American response to most things.

How did he force Parliament to sign the warrant?
With several thousand armed men.

Parliament has no power to dissolve monarchy. Only the queen herself can choose to step down.

Of course Parliament can dissolve the monarchy. Don't forget that it's only by Parlaiments good will that we still have a monarch. For a few hundred years the kings and queens of England have just been puppets. Parlaiment just threw in a couple of small duties to make sure that they wouldn't get too upset.

It doesn't look as though any of this was adressed to you anyway, but as youve given your opinion, I only feel obliged to correct it. Your ideas seem a little warped. The queen is not required to "do anything" with the power afforded her as that is not how our country is run, quite simply. I certainly have far more pride in the Queen, than I do in our current prime minister. The Queen is a symbol of more than the British Monarchy, she is a symbol of a long and proud history of a nation that has been at the heart of the world for centuries, with a distiguished and ancient heritage. Naturally, I wouldn't expect YOU to understand this.

Well said :)

anyway, its not a case of pledging alleigance to the queen, and its not a case of she has no real power why do we need her...

she is there because, since a time when america was more civilised and intelligent, there have been royals. many countries have now or have at some point had royalty of some kind. It would be unwise to do away with them, firstly because of the blow to tourism, secondly because we will end up with a president, who has significantly more power than a PM, and thirdly because she represents a national pride that, if any govrnment removes, will lose them a damn good portion of votes (and what politician wanst THAT)

Of course Parliament can dissolve the monarchy. Don't forget that it's only by Parlaiments good will that we still have a monarch. For a few hundred years the kings and queens of England have just been puppets. Parlaiment just threw in a couple of small duties to make sure that they wouldn't get too upset.

Technically he was right. Parliament cannot actually lawfully abolish the monarchy. It would require some real law changes, which the queen could block anyway...

The Queen is not requiered to do any thing she just has to show up and be there for the people she does very little for the state except be there for the people. Potentially she could stand up to the Government in a time of crisis such as war, but again she has not had to do this as the we have an uncanny ability to pick the right leader in times of war. She is just a figure head but she says the right things at the right time. After the terrorist attacks she spoke to the country from the Palace in London on her doorstep almost. She simbolises and unifies british spirt when it is needed. I would be proud to swear my allegiance and die fighting for queen and country. The army is exceptionaly proud of the queen as are the other two services and if we removed them there would be a lot of confused renaming of regiments.
We have a queen because we have seen what happens when we dont (Cromwell) and although ouur Monarchs have not always been good or sane other kings and queens have made up for it.

Technically he was right. Parliament cannot actually lawfully abolish the monarchy. It would require some real law changes, which the queen could block anyway...

Belive me, I'm an A-Level politics student. Parlaiment has the power to bypass the monarchs 'seal of approval' and dissolve the position forever. English Republic Mark II

Belive me, I'm an A-Level politics student. Parlaiment has the power to bypass the monarchs 'seal of approval' and dissolve the position forever. English Republic Mark II

Maybe you should check again

Maybe you should check again


The last monarch to refuse to pass a bill was Queen Anne, but there is now a mutual understanding between monarch and parliament that the king or queen will not refuse a bill. The queen's duties, which at one time depicted real power, are now ceremonial, and she has no choice but to carry them out,

How Come This Is A Question That Should Be Answered By British People.....And Most Of The Ones That Have Answered....Are Bloody Americans, You Have No Right To Comment On The British Monarchy. So What If Under International Law America Is A British Crown Dependancy, You Have No Right To Comment On Something That Does Not Concern You... Just Shut Up You Stupid Yanks

How Come This Is A Question That Should Be Answered By British People.....And Most Of The Ones That Have Answered....Are Bloody Americans, You Have No Right To Comment On The British Monarchy. So What If Under International Law America Is A British Crown Dependancy, You Have No Right To Comment On Something That Does Not Concern You... Just Shut Up You Stupid Yanks


I have two questions:

One.....why are you capitalizing every first letter of every word?

Two: Why are you being an asshat?

How Come This Is A Question That Should Be Answered By British People.....And Most Of The Ones That Have Answered....Are Bloody Americans, You Have No Right To Comment On The British Monarchy. So What If Under International Law America Is A British Crown Dependancy, You Have No Right To Comment On Something That Does Not Concern You... Just Shut Up You Stupid Yanks

Quite bloody right. In case you remember America, you booted us out anyway. And it was at this point that you lost all right to have an opinion on this subject.

Im British. My father, mother and grandparents all members of The Royal Engineers or the Royal Military Police and my Bother may join the one of the Queens other regiments. Guess whos side the army is on. Or Her Majestys Ship Illustrious and the rest of the Royal navy or the Royal Air Force. From what ive seen the Armed Forces are fiercly proud of queen and country otherwise they wouldnt be prepared to die for them.

I have two questions:

One.....why are you capitalizing every first letter of every word?

Two: Why are you being an asshat?

1. Because I'm angry....thats why...
2. And what kind of language is an "asshat"???

I am angry because the yanks have no right to decide whats wrong with the monarchy and how my country is governed.... we can find plenty of flaws with the way The United States is governed

The problem with talking to us BRits about the Monachy is that we suddenly become very patriotic just to defend what is ours BECAUSE its ours and we have very little at the moment so an innocent debate can soon turn to bigotry and arrogance.

She is your queen, like it or not. She's queen of Great Britiain and northern island, and the commonwealth.

Unless you succeed, which would NEVER happen, wales woudent last 5 minutes on its own.
northern IRELAND you idiot

The problem with talking to us BRits about the Monachy is that we suddenly become very patriotic just to defend what is ours BECAUSE its ours and we have very little at the moment so an innocent debate can soon turn to bigotry and arrogance.

There does tend to be a bit off that, admittedly from me, but I think you'll find that there is also a lot of general self-loathing, where lots of Brits moan about ho much they hate everything about Britain and especially the monarchy. This is quite sad really, but yes, some of us, like, are staunch patriots, although almost all the arrogance shown in thread has been displayed by American "intruders."

Im British. My father, mother and grandparents all members of The Royal Engineers or the Royal Military Police and my Bother may join the one of the Queens other regiments. Guess whos side the army is on. Or Her Majestys Ship Illustrious and the rest of the Royal navy or the Royal Air Force. From what ive seen the Armed Forces are fiercly proud of queen and country otherwise they wouldnt be prepared to die for them.

AS you can tell from this i am a staunch patriot and im going to join the Royal Signals Regiment i go to the only British Military School, The Duke of Yorks Royal Military School and we have a member of then royal family down each year for different events (but we never have the Duke of York interestingly enough). But it is still no reasson to blind oneself with patriotism.

And the so called "american intruders" are allowed there say in this why shouldnt they as long as they dont slag off the royal family for no reason or for being British or invading them hundreds of years ago

1. Because I'm angry....thats why...
2. And what kind of language is an "asshat"???

I am angry because the yanks have no right to decide whats wrong with the monarchy and how my country is governed.... we can find plenty of flaws with the way The United States is governed

lmao, no offense mate but just imagine how the yanks feel with topic after topic telling them how they should have done it.

Apologies for my so claimed "arrogance" but I do not put my life on the line nearly everyday for my Queen and country, just to have them slagged off by some "know it all" americans.

Apologies for my so claimed "arrogance" but I do not put my life on the line nearly everyday for my Queen and country, just to have them slagged off by some "know it all" americans.

Are you in the Armed Forces or some thing else

I honour the Queen.

The Royals are all Britain has left, seeing as we have a government of dictators and scum.

And America wouldn't exist in its current form if it wasn't for the British. Same goes for Canada, Australia, India and all sorts of other places.

1. Because I'm angry....thats why...
2. And what kind of language is an "asshat"???

I am angry because the yanks have no right to decide whats wrong with the monarchy and how my country is governed.... we can find plenty of flaws with the way The United States is governed

You tell those bloody yanks! And for all of you Americans reading this, re-read the title. It doesn't say 'For Brits and American Muppets', no, it says 'For Brits'. Now bugger off. You have no right to say your opinions about whether you like the Queen, and you haven't had that right since you made your little shit-hole an independent country. Now, should we remake this topic, and make sure it is 'For Brits' and us only? Because judging by the amount of Americans, the poll results might not be entirely truthful.

And yes, what sort of language is 'asshat'?

Rule Brittania!

Personaly i think we should take a page out of the Bolsheviks book and get rid of them, i see no reason or argument why we should have this undemocractic and dated institution that represents ignorance and exploitation, the 'Good for tourism argument' is a joke. I honestly couldnt care less what happend to these people who live off the hard working people of Britain so they can perform a role that is no longer needed or wanted, but the central england of my fair land would never get rid of them, voting Thatcher for 11 years and reading the Daily 'Mien Kampf' Mail clearly shows there loyaltys

Apologies for my so claimed "arrogance" but I do not put my life on the line nearly everyday for my Queen and country, just to have them slagged off by some "know it all" americans.


Hey now...

I got no particular beef with your Queen, or your country.

Opinions are what we people do....cant really help it.
Unless a person is very dull, and lacks the mental will to fart...they will have opinons.

We Americans have a saying about opinions.

"opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one, and they all stink."

Okay so the poll is probably dodgy but the Americans should be allowed to voice there opinions, i give mine on ones about America provided i know somthing about it and also there will probably be a weird trend along the line of "players of nationstates are 80% more patriotic than those who dont or somthing :D

Is anyone actually going to explain what an asshat is? I wouldn't like to imagine that its an item of clothing....

Are you in the Armed Forces or some thing else
Correct, An Officer In The Royal Light Dragoons

No, I don't like the idea of swearing allegiance to the Queen, Prince Charles or anyone else like that.
I am a supporter of a republic which I would like to see asap. The royal family are welcome to stay as private citizens equal to everyone else with the same rights as evryone else.
To me, the monarchy stands for everything I don't like about Britain, namely the elitism, 'keep you in your place' mentality (pecking order) etc.
They aren't justified the expense and privilege. You had the Queen's mother, the Queen Mother, who ran up huge debts and was effectively bank-rolled by Coutts Bank all because she thought she deserved to live a life befitting a Queen. In normal life, the average citizen would have been chased by the banks by now and would have been up the creek without a paddle.
I don't like the idea that the royal family are somehow deserving of curtseying and deferring to - especially when some of them have done little to actually deserve it.
They are arch-conservative and reactionary, and are a bulwark against fundamental change. They like to maintain a 'dignified' distance between themselves and, us, the 'common people' who actually contiune to allow them to live a luxuriant life.
They are undemocratic. Effectively, citizens get no right to choose their own head of state which in an age of democract seems untenable.
They are secretive- they don't like the idea of the public knowing too much about their finances for example. If they ever go along with any change its usually because the clamour for it has become so loud that they have little choice and they are effectively dragged into doing something they'd have sooner NOT done - e.g over Diana, the Queen paying tax on her income etc. They are rarely proactive- Like I said, they are secretive and conservative.
In any average walk of life, most of them would have succumbed to their lack of life skills.
Some say they symbolise Britian. Well, I'm sure many of the Irish, Welsh and Scots would have problems with that. Any thay are, afterall, an English institution. Also, there is more to Britain than the monarchy. We don't actually need a monarchy to illustrate the accomplishments of Britain and its continuity. They are part of our history- doesn't mean we have to maintain them in modern times.

I really hope for a republic, where the people actually get to chose their own head of state rather than having a family foisted upon us because of accident of birth. Funny really, most people who defend the monarchy actually seem embarrassed to say they 'love' the Queen etc and they usually always retreat into 'Oh, well, they're good for tourism' and ' They're a better alternative than a president' (assuming that that is because many people equate a president a mere pleb, whilst a monarch , of course, is our social 'better'), which are pathetic and lame excuses for keeping a monarchy. Perhaps it demonstrates the actual lack of a good reason for keeping the current system.
People say that fewer people would come to the UK if the monarchy went. To me, thats rubbish. And what about the other reasons people come here, the history, Shakespeare, architecture, scenery etc. And what about other countries like France. They don't have a monarchy and yet France attracts more tourists than the UK (especially Americans). To say that people will somehow not bother visiting is rubbish. Aslo it demonstrates a very narrow perception of what Britain is and that it is more than the monarchy and a adjacent wasteland with no meaning.
Most countries survive quite well and function more than adequately WITHOUT a monarch.
Anyway, they are some of my thoughts....

Opps....Wrong Log in....Yes I am In The Armed Forces... An Officer Of The Light Dragoons

Republics have not... and never will work. Human nature does not allow it.
Name one successful true republic as you have outlined.

Republics have not... and never will work. Human nature does not allow it.
Name one successful true republic as you have outlined.

Ireland seems to be going okay.

Well i suppose Ireland isn't a true republic....but neither is Britain a true monarchy. :)

Republics have not... and never will work. Human nature does not allow it.
Name one successful true republic as you have outlined.

Not true. Any countries in the world that have problems are due to a whole host of other reasons, nothing to do with whether they are monarchies or not.

Ireland seems to be going okay.
Irelands economy is falling and they have just about signed off their sovernty to the european union.

Republics have not... and never will work. Human nature does not allow it.
Name one successful true republic as you have outlined.


Technically, the United States is a Democratic Republic.

And regardless of how you feel about us, you must admit were pretty succsessful.

No, I don't like the idea of swearing allegiance to the Queen, Prince Charles or anyone else like that.
I am a supporter of a republic which I would like to see asap. The royal family are welcome to stay as private citizens equal to everyone else with the same rights as evryone else.
To me, the monarchy stands for everything I don't like about Britain, namely the elitism, 'keep you in your place' mentality (pecking order) etc.
They aren't justified the expense and privilege. You had the Queen's mother, the Queen Mother, who ran up huge debts and was effectively bank-rolled by Coutts Bank all because she thought she deserved to live a life befitting a Queen. In normal life, the average citizen would have been chased by the banks by now and would have been up the creek without a paddle.
I don't like the idea that the royal family are somehow deserving of curtseying and deferring to - especially when some of them have done little to actually deserve it.
They are arch-conservative and reactionary, and are a bulwark against fundamental change. They like to maintain a 'dignified' distance between themselves and, us, the 'common people' who actually contiune to allow them to live a luxuriant life.
They are secretive- they don't like the idea of the public knowing too much about their finances for example. If they ever go along with any change its usually because the clamour for it has become so loud that they have little choice and they are effectively dragged into doing something they'd have sooner NOT done - e.g over Diana, the Queen paying tax on her income etc. They are rarely proactive- Like I said, they are secretive and conservative.
In any average walk of life, most of them would have succumbed to their lack of life skills.
Some say they symbolise Britian. Well, I'm sure many of the Irish, Welsh and Scots would have problems with that. Any thay are, afterall, an English institution. Also, there is more to Britain than the monarchy. We don't actually need a monarchy to illustrate the accomplishments of Britain and its continuity. They are part of our history- doesn't mean we have to maintain them in modern times.

I really hope for a republic, where the people actually get to chose their own head of state rather than having a family foisted upon us who becuase of accident of birth. Funny really, most people who defend the monarchy actually seem embarrassed to say they 'love' the Queen etc and they usually always retreat into 'Oh, well, they're good for tourism' and ' They're a better alternative than a president' (assuming that that is because many people equate a president a mere pleb, whilst a monarch , of course, is our social 'better'), which are pathetic and lame excuses for keeping a monarchy. Perhaps it demonstrates the actual lack of a genuinely felt good reason for keeping the current system. People say that fewer people would come to the UK if the monarchy went as they'd have no one to see. To me, thats rubbish. Few people will actually get to see the Queen anyway. And what about the other reasons people come here, the history, Shakespeare, architecture, scenery etc. And what about other countries like France. They don't have a monarchy and yet France attracts more tourists than the UK (especially Americans). To say that people will somehow not bother visiting is rubbish. Aslo it demonstrates a very narrow perception of what Britain is and that it is more than the monarchy and a adjacent wasteland with no meaning.
Most countries survive quite well and function more than adequately WITHOUT a monarch.
Anyway, they are some of my thoughts....

I agree with your opinions about the Royal family, but think the monarchy can have some kind of purpose. I'm not really sure whether abolishing it would be positive or negative.

I agree fully that they are a lazy elite and have no right to the kind of existence they live. However, the fact that they are not pro-active, and are conservative is a good thing in my opinion, even though I am not conservative myself. They are reasonably politically neutral and limit the damage that stupid politicians can do. People also take time to adjust to positive social change so it's not totally negative that they inhibit progress. The backlash from changing too fast could be a bigger problem towards social justice. And the fact that they never actually use what power they have is good. In contrast, a President would be just another politician, with all the problems associated with having to gain votes and only worry about their term of office.

Irelands economy is falling and they have just about signed off their sovernty to the european union.

Irelands growth is about the 2.5% mark and that last comment is utter hog wash.

Just out of interest if Republics are so bad...Monarchys are equally so, just look how many are here today?

The main reasons for abolishing the queen seem to be as follows:

1. She has a ton of money that she doesn't deserve.

2. Erm...

Its amazing just how far out you can pad one argument...

The main reasons for abolishing the queen seem to be as follows:

1. She has a ton of money that she doesn't deserve.

2. Erm...

Its amazing just how far out you can pad one argument...


that's the reason many people feel. However, it goes much further than that. What's your suggestion for the future?

I like what i see of the Queen she is distant to me but i like what she does and how she does it and the fact that she speaks this funky english always makes me smile!

Now as far as pride for Britain i am proud that i live in Britain and i am proud to be british

why shouldnt i be

The main reasons for abolishing the queen seem to be as follows:

1. She has a ton of money that she doesn't deserve.

2. Erm...

Its amazing just how far out you can pad one argument...

Actualy the real arguement for getting rid of the Queen is a lot more sophisticated than that...which is why it's seldom used...because most people wouldn't get it.

If you have a Queen with no power you have a head of state...but fewer checks and balances against the Prime Minister. Therefore there is no need for that post to exist. If we have a Queen/King then we need to have no with power. As most people like to elect their heads of state I would say that wouldn't happen.

So if we don't have a dictator what we need is a President and aparliament to
be a check/balance against him/her.

What I think we have at the moment with the current system is an ineffective mix between the two systems which just does not work.

I would also like to see the break up of Great Britain because I feel that all three states get forgotten. Wales is the last on anyones list followed by Scotland, but any decision also has to take those states into account...which means the decision is not good for England either.

They are reasonably politically neutral and limit the damage that stupid politicians can do. People also take time to adjust to positive social change so it's not totally negative that they inhibit progress. The backlash from changing too fast could be a bigger problem towards social justice. And the fact that they never actually use what power they have is good. In contrast, a President would be just another politician, with all the problems associated with having to gain votes and only worry about their term of office.

Don't know whether if they inhibit positive social progress is such a good thing for keeping the monarchy. Also I think they are deserving of being a reluctant institution. Although I always though Diana was a mere mortal and not cracked up to what people thought she was, neverthless, the debate over the flag and getting the royals to come back to London rather than stick so rigidly to 'protocol' when she died in 1997, demonstrated a massive gulf between what people wanted and what they thought they were going to do. The result is that they were forcibly made to get off their high horse. A dramatic climb down that had implications long after the event.
As for using their power - they have little official power left and are effectively rubber stamps for a democratically elected government. They do wield a certian degree of influence in certain circles, but even someone like Prince Charles realised the limits in what power he had if his biography by Jonathan Dimbleby is anything to go by.
I agree about the backlash element which is why in my view, the monarchy, if it is to be removed will be done so if and when the public demand for it becomes strong. Until then, they will remain.
Presidents often do worry about reelection. But what about ceremonial presidents like in Germany , Israel etc? They are not executive presidents like th US and France and do not wield much power. Personally, Id; sooner have te right to elect my own head of state, ceremnial president or otherwise, than be denied that choice and right.

Republics have not... and never will work. Human nature does not allow it.
Name one successful true republic as you have outlined.

True republic? If it has no monarch, it's a republic... The USA, Germany, France, Singapore, and many other countries have been successful without monarchs. And in the modern world, monarchies only work if the monarch is a powerless figurehead.

Irelands economy is falling and they have just about signed off their sovernty to the european union.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Funniest thing i've ever heard *wipes tears of laughter from eyes*

Ireland has been called the 'poster boy' of a successful EU country. From the high inflation and mass immigration of the 1980's to the the technology strong economy of today which of one of the few poor states to join (Spain, Portugal, Greece) that has put the money to good long lasting use.

I like you, you're funny :D

True republic? If it has no monarch, it's a republic... The USA, Germany, France, Singapore, and many other countries have been successful without monarchs. And in the modern world, monarchies only work if the monarch is a powerless figurehead.


I generally agree. Essentially, its the European monarchies that are the figure head ones, and I suppose, Japan. However, there is great concern over others like Nepal, Brunei, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Lesotho, etc. They are all autocratic. Infact the general trend with monarchies is that they tend to be bastions of autocracy and a lack of genuine democracy.

AS you can tell from this i am a staunch patriot and im going to join the Royal Signals Regiment i go to the only British Military School, The Duke of Yorks Royal Military School and we have a member of then royal family down each year for different events (but we never have the Duke of York interestingly enough).
Small world, my dad used to go to that school!

What's...there to be proud of?

You have the symbol of British monarchy, a force that has thrown the world into quite a good number of wars for hundreds of years.

You have a really old lady who doesn't make a lot of appearances.

And you have a Prime Minister who can just act in the name of the Crown.

You just have a person just sitting there with all that power and isn't really doing much.

1. Any war that the British have entered in about the last two centuries has been entered upon the orders of Parliament, NOT the Monarch

2. The Queen makes a large amount of public appearances, as do other members of the Royal Family, and Her Majesty is only 79 years of age

3. The Prime Minister acts in the name of the Crown, but holds the power of the People - the Queen is Head of State and her powers are merely ceremonial, whilst the legislative and executive power lies in Parliament. As Head of Government, the Prime Minister holds the power

4. To re-iterate - the Queen has NO powers (other than ceremonial) and She does a large amount of Charity work, and works also in Her capacity as Supreme Governor of the Church of England

I am very proud of the monarchy. It is a symbol of the fact that Britain has never succumbed to pathetic revolutions, unlike the French and Russians, and to a lesser extent the US, but has instead peacefully and sensibly evolved its political institutions over hundreds of years. To turn Britain into a republic would be an insult to the nationa identity. I can tolerate those who are not British criticising the system, simply because nationhood is about confrontation between states; though i find their arguments fallible. What i cannot stand is all these Britons who utterly misunderstand their own heritage, they make me ashamed that so many of us can be so blind and idiotic as to damage our great nation for the sake of absurd leftist values.

You can forget about all that rubbish about it being undemocratic, Britain is the birthplace of democracy in the modern world, and continues to be the most democratic nation in the world, what with the various problems found in the American system. Show some damn pride in what so many people have died to preserve.

What I mean is are you proud to honor or pledge allegiance to her? Or do you wish she was not even their and you had no monarchy?
hell no - i have never, and never intend to pledge allegiance to anyone who doesn't deserve to be in the position of power they occupy

I really hope for a republic, where the people actually get to chose their own head of state rather than having a family foisted upon us because of accident of birth.

The Queen has no legislative, executive or judiciary powers, and is merely a figurehead of the nation. She holds NO power, other than for ceremonial purposes. The Prime Minister, as Head of Government, holds power. The only difference between Monarchy and Republic is that
1. There is an elected Head of State to replace the inherited one that had no power
2. There is no national figurehead in a republic
3. If Britian were to become a Republic, we would lose an ENORMOUS amount of our heritage

I am very proud of the monarchy. It is a symbol of the fact that Britain has never succumbed to pathetic revolutions, unlike the French and Russians, and to a lesser extent the US, but has instead peacefully and sensibly evolved its political institutions over hundreds of years. To turn Britain into a republic would be an insult to the nationa identity. I can tolerate those who are not British criticising the system, simply because nationhood is about confrontation between states; though i find their arguments fallible. What i cannot stand is all these Britons who utterly misunderstand their own heritage, they make me ashamed that so many of us can be so blind and idiotic as to damage our great nation for the sake of absurd leftist values.

You can forget about all that rubbish about it being undemocratic, Britain is the birthplace of democracy in the modern world, and continues to be the most democratic nation in the world, what with the various problems found in the American system. Show some damn pride in what so many people have died to preserve.

Yeah, your right. Being ruled by Germans must really screw you guys up in the head
:D :D

I am very proud of the monarchy. It is a symbol of the fact that Britain has never succumbed to pathetic revolutions, unlike the French and Russians, and to a lesser extent the US, but has instead peacefully and sensibly evolved its political institutions over hundreds of years. To turn Britain into a republic would be an insult to the nationa identity. I can tolerate those who are not British criticising the system, simply because nationhood is about confrontation between states; though i find their arguments fallible. What i cannot stand is all these Britons who utterly misunderstand their own heritage, they make me ashamed that so many of us can be so blind and idiotic as to damage our great nation for the sake of absurd leftist values.

You can forget about all that rubbish about it being undemocratic, Britain is the birthplace of democracy in the modern world, and continues to be the most democratic nation in the world, what with the various problems found in the American system. Show some damn pride in what so many people have died to preserve.

Brava!

. The only difference between Monarchy and Republic is that
1. There is an elected Head of State to replace the inherited one that had no power

Agreed.


2. There is no national figurehead in a republic


Er, no. The president is the national head of state- the figurehead, totem, what ever you want to call he/she.



3. If Britian were to become a Republic, we would lose an ENORMOUS amount of our heritage

Er, no. You seem to be saying that Britian is some sort of museum piece, which is isn't, or at least it shouldn't be. We do not need a monarchy to 'remind' us of our supposedly illustrious past. France, if I may use as an example, is a very proud, very aware nation, and thats despite NOT having a monarchy. If you wanto to hang on to the coat tails of HM The Queen, then so be it. But I, for one, don't. And I realise there is far, far more to this country than can be summed up by the Windsor family. How narrow minded it is to suggest that getting rid of the monarchy decimates our national worth. How cheap.

To turn Britain into a republic would be an insult to the nationa identity. I can tolerate those who are not British criticising the system, simply because nationhood is about confrontation between states; though i find their arguments fallible. What i cannot stand is all these Britons who utterly misunderstand their own heritage, they make me ashamed that so many of us can be so blind and idiotic as to damage our great nation for the sake of absurd leftist values.

You can forget about all that rubbish about it being undemocratic, Britain is the birthplace of democracy in the modern world, and continues to be the most democratic nation in the world, what with the various problems found in the American system. Show some damn pride in what so many people have died to preserve.


Er, yes. To invest sovereignty in the people is 'un-British' is it????
I speak as a one time monarchist who saw the light.
Having a monarchy IS quintessentially undemocratic, like so much else in this country. Oh, and by the way, Britiain is not the birthplace of democracy look at the Ancient Greeks. Most democratic nation in the world? Look further afield perhaps, say Scandinavia. As for the American system. I agree, its far from perfect undoubtedly despite many Americans' weddedness to the system. However, it is also far more democratic than that of the UK in all sorts of ways.

If we had a republic we'd just be giving yet more power to Downing Street and Westminster.

No, the monarchy should stay, it at least reminds us of what once was. Sure, it's expensive, but much cheaper than an illegal invasion of Iraq and pointlessly merging Scottish Infantry regiments.

I disagree with an independent Scotland though, Scotland wouldn't be half as good as it is without having England bolted onto the bottom.

Feed the royal family to starving african children.

You can forget about all that rubbish about it being undemocratic, Britain is the birthplace of democracy in the modern world, and continues to be the most democratic nation in the world, what with the various problems found in the American system. Show some damn pride in what so many people have died to preserve.

Oh god I'm English and I know that is rubbish. Also your point about the monarchy being our identity...is that really true...would that mean we would have no identity without her? I don't think so. If one woman is all there is to our people then we are in a very sorry state.

Let me put forward an interesting opinion:
1) I'm English/British/whatever you want to call it.
2) I'm proud of that.

I don't see how the royal family has to come into it at all. The Queen is there, that's just how it is. I'm not for it or against it. Ok so the royal family are rich, but so are lots of other people and I don't hear anyone complaining about them. And as for the person who suggested Bolshevism as a solution, what happened the last time someone tried that?

Her Majesty is boring but is still my queen,I hope for William to become King. That will be a happy day!! His majesty King William! Oh, and I honor Her majesty

Small world, my dad used to go to that school!

Any idea what house he was in? And has he joined the Army?

As I said earlier on page 3 or 4 the Royal Family is simply required to be at the right places at the right time to say the right thing they are the epitome of ENGLISHNESS whilst hardly being English (George Saxe-Coburg-Gotha). They are a family who have there face printed on our money and whos coat of arms grace many fine buildings.

Why are they not got rid of?
Because it would be too expensive renaming most government offices, armed forces regiments and ships, removal of coats of arms off major govewrnment buildings. Who would get the palaces if they were sold, some russian tycoon?

The Royalty is so heavily entrenced into the system and it saves money and time in writing a proper constitution. It would also mean new national Anthem (preferably Jurusalem) and any government who attempted any of this would find itself out of office within days and never elected again. NO party wants that. They are cheaper to keep here than get rid of, they cost only 50p per person per year to keep, and they are cutting costs. We like our money and stamps with the queens head on and change that and we would end up with Euros because it would be simpler than creating a new currency and have to put our country names on stamps

I am not proud of the royal family. I like some of the things my country has done, other things i feel are disgusting. However my not liking the royal family HAS nothing to do with patriotism.

Where i live Prince Charles owns a lot of land. Prince Charles has ruled that a tesco's (a supermarket for all those who dont know what this is) can only supply food so as to protect the local buisinesses. Unfortunatly he failed to realise that:

a) Most of the local buisnesses sell touristy crap with little practical value

b) Where there would be local buisinesses we have chain stores.

I love my Queen :)

yes, i'm just the smallest bit Patriotic Monarchist, but not too much (FOR QUEEN AND COUNTRY!!!) the queen still exorcises some uber style power but England needs to stop being a crappy Constitutional Monarchy, if your going to do somthing you do it right.

I believe in the monarchy as an institution; it's a nice little earner, it makes our country more interesting, and troops don't have to pledge their allegiance to a specific parliamenary regime. Also it's just cool. :D I wouldn't "pledge allegiance" to the Queen or "honour" her, but I am in favour of our country remaining a constitutional monarchy.

I have too much self respect than to honour the Queen. Honour the average citizen and their contribution, perhaps, but not any royal.

A deep, deep, deep part of me is screaming me to be proud of queen and country...but i suspect thats some propoganda from long past that snuck into my brain.

Like some of you said the curent monarchy is prety much for show these days, though it does give some boom to tourisim.

Now the band Queen, THAT would be somthing to be proud of.