Royalty the queen and her family.

Some folks neither adore or detest them, they are here & born into a family & life that they had no more say in than the rest of us,. ...
Many folks would be out of work without them , etc etc ,
Let’s not just focus on the negatives at least not without acknowledging the positives.

There's no positives for the public but plenty for the Royals

More people visit the Palace of Versailles they don't have RF

If all palaces castles were open all year round many people would visit to see our history.

Palaces and castles attract interest because of their history, not because of today’s royals. Get rid of the monarchy and Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle can be fully opened up to tourists all year, funding their own upkeep through ticket sales and offering a unique glimpse into Britain’s past.

Buckingham Palace is thought to contain one of the largest and most valuable art collections in the world, including the largest collection of Van Gogh paintings - yet it’s all hidden away. The palace has the potential in a republic to become a world class museum and gallery open all year round.

Agree Bridgeit seems their wealth stops any discussion on their lives , they mustn’t have any human emotions because they are wealthy , impossible to have both

I'm not jealous of their wealth. I'm p***ed off that they get to have a say in how the government operates just because of who their ancestors were, instead of any talents they might have.
There's no positives that couldn't matched by having a modern democracy.

Whether or not RF provide employment or generate income doesn't justify having a monarchy.
No one has said that members of the RF shouldn't have emotions.
Being a republican is not about hating people.
Everyone has a choice in how they behave.

Being a republican causes one to refer to Prince Phillip as -

Phil the Greek . Being a republican is not about hate ?

Phil the Greek . Being a republican is not about hate ?

Anniebach, good morning!
You are talking about one individual, not the majority of republicans. Same as your views on M and H don't speak for others.
And calling him Phil the Greek doesn't indicate hate in my opinion. It's just silly.

It does indicate hate in my opinion ,

You're entitled to your views. It doesn't prove Republicans are about hate.

www.republic.org.uk/statement_of_principles

I was speaking of one republican not all republicans

Thank you for clarifying. It wasn't clear in this post.

Being a republican causes one to refer to Prince Phillip as -

Phil the Greek . Being a republican is not about hate ?

The RF holds the piramid of the class system together we cannot be a meritocratic society while it exists they hold us back.

See the struggles of people coping in this rich country with austerity millions starving food banks.

RF never have to struggle they get richer and richer.

Recent events regarding Andrew and mixing with such dubious people as in the father of Princess Latifah, has disappointed me to put it mildly. I think her handling of Harry and Megan spot on. I knew Harry's heart would be broken, never dreamt it would be so quick, Harry must think he's been on a roller coaster, he's fragile anyway.
If anyone's got it right it's William and his family, the rest I'm not interested in, they should pay at taxes like everone else, if we owed money never paying tax we would have to pay it all back, as for owning a whole country that's beyond the pale.

Phil the Greek was a nickname coined by Private Eye decades ago.

Spsrkling is that fair, Andrew was a friend of Epstein, stayed at his home. The Queen was photographed talking to that King, or whatever title he has, at the races, is talking to someone who has the same interest in horses equal - mixing with ?

I remember I sometimes gave a lift to a woman, her husband
sexually assaulted his daughter and the woman knew, was i
mixing with sexual abusers ?

That's right nadateturbe Republic are not about hate It's Succinct Clear and respectful in it message.

11 March 2021: Louise Cooper on Royals, Class and the Cost of Monarchy
On Republic website podcast

Annie When that man has kept his own daughter from freedom. I think the queen should be more suspect who she shares interests with.

If anyone thinks abolishing the Royal Family and electing a Head of State will eradicate homelessness, poverty etc then I am sorry you are wrong.

GrannyGravy13

If anyone thinks abolishing the Royal Family and electing a Head of State will eradicate homelessness, poverty etc then I am sorry you are wrong.

Who said that GG13?

Just making up straw man arguments doesn't really get us anywhere.

Really Grany , everyone with interests should be more suspect with whom they share interests , that would be very difficult would it not

Don’t see how the two are connected. I think whilst you have a top family ie royals you will have that class stuff, it is part of the whole scenario. I prefer the meritocracies personally. Pity old Oliver Cromwell was so extreme, he could have sorted it out.

no Strawman argument Alegrias1 if you follow Grany’s posts you will see that they imply that the RF is responsible for the class system and therefore the UK cannot be a meritocratic society I am just disputing this.

It is a strawman (why the italics?) because it alleges that we think our preferred form of government will magically erase any kind of poverty and homelessness, and that's not what we think at all. It will however erase the idea that any group of people are inherently better at ruling than any other just because of their birth, and that directly leads the concept of a meritocracy.

GG13 makes a realistic point. It is not a straw man, neither is it a deductive fallacy - dissolving the monarchy will not create equal opportunities, neither will it balance wealth and privilege. This has been proven over and over in every country that has got rid of its monarchy. The real straw man in this discussion is that getting rid of the RF will improve anything at all.

The only benefit in a so called meritocracy is the illusion that everyone stands an equal chance. It's a bread and circuses idea that maintains societal divisions no differently than any other political ideal. Human beings are simply incapable of being fair on a societal level - we're just not wired that way.

Getting rid of the RF would simply serve to pacify the sensibilities and ideals of the republicans. In real terms it would have no effect on their quality of life or their opportunities ( Caveat - in this country). It's no more a real benefit that painting £350 million for the NHS on the side of a bus.

Does anyone still think that the RF have any kind of rule?

Getting rid of the monarchy may not benefit me directly, that's correct. But it will transform us into a modern country that doesn't rely on inherited privilege in our governance.

And try telling Kamala Harris that the idea of a meritocracy has no value.