Queens Speech

We might have got King Andrew if something had happened to Charles - a monarchy doesn’t guarantee a good HoS.

Can I just post a pro-forma here to save people some time?

If we have a president then we might end up with <insert the names of the last three leaders of a political party you don't support> or Trump.

Feel free to copy and paste to save all that tedious thinking typing.

I do believe that if volver were to take a poll of everyone in this country of ours, he would find that there is a very great support for our Queen, and the Royal family

Not sure why you think I should have to do the poll but I can guess why you picked me. Anyway.

I'm sure that would be the outcome too. But people change. Attitudes change. One regular poster here has changed from "on the fence" to "republican" quite recently. It's perfectly valid to talk about changing things in the future.

Why do you think I'm a "he"?

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/05/21/young-britons-are-turning-their-backs-monarchy

Thank goodness for the young.

We might get a king who at various times in his life has been the object of public humiliation, ridicule and anger. We might get his wife who was once vilified. Thank goodness we don't get to choose the H of S. We might get someone like Charles.

volver

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/05/21/young-britons-are-turning-their-backs-monarchy

Thank goodness for the young.

According to this article 61% of the population as a whole still support the monarchy. The percentage shifts as you get older so young people may change and be more pro monarchy. Who knows? But at the moment there is more support for the monarchy than not.

Yes I know.

volver
why do you think I’m a “he”?

It’s because you’re a scientist. ?

My impression is that younger people get more insensed about "goings on" generally, they are more volatile. So with the "rocky" two years mentioned by the article it is not surprising their support has dropped off.
The Queen might not totally get that, but I think if anything William and Catherine are the ones have their heads screwed on and Charles appears to be taking notice of his son in changing things for the future.

I remember reading somewhere that there used to be republicans in Parliament, at the start of the 20th century. Can you imagine an MP standing up today to say that we should replace the Queen? They'd be lynched. I think that we have been lulled into a false sense of security by having the same person as HoS for 70 years, someone who has basically kept quiet and tried not to offend anyone. But when things start to change, then we might see more people questioning the status quo again.

When we get the comments about Trump, or Johnson or whoever, it makes me wonder if people think that republicans want to move to a system like the US, where the Head of State is also the Head of Government. I would prefer a system where the 2 roles were separate, such as they have in Eire. (Where Dana once stood for President, remember?) I also wonder if people think we'll only vote once and whoever wins will be President for life!

And I really just can't understand the mindset that says we are better off not voting for who we want to represent us. That's just a mystery to me.

Germanshepherdsmum

volver
why do you think I’m a “he”?

It’s because you’re a scientist. ?

And "assertive" with it

Case proved.?

Not on topic but does anyone think that Charles has aged in the last 2 years? Obviously everyone has, but he's not as upright as Philip used to be.

@SkyNews

In asking Charles and William to take her place for the Queen's Speech, Her Majesty is in some ways future-proofing an institution which she has worked so hard to protect, says Sky's Rhiannon Mills.

Indeed. Protecting the monarchy and their family's interests has always been a monarch's number one priority. Perhaps instead of this sycophantic nonsense we could now have some serious debate about what this means for the constitution of a democracy.

The "I don't want a Republic because who'd want President Blair/Johnson etc" is nonsense and even more so when you look at the long list of monarchs we got through birthright.

Which bit of your post is a quote and which your own views Grany? Could you clarify, please.

Grany some of us just want to keep the Monarchy, the continuity, the connections with the past and the thread into the future.

I totally respect yours and others views who would be happy with an elected H o S, I like to think that you and other republicans respect our pro monarchy views.

Do we need to replace the monarchy with a President? Couldn’t we manage with neither?

GrannyGravy13

Grany some of us just want to keep the Monarchy, the continuity, the connections with the past and the thread into the future.

I totally respect yours and others views who would be happy with an elected H o S, I like to think that you and other republicans respect our pro monarchy views.

Sorry, I don't mean to speak for Grany.

But supporting the monarchy because of the continuity it provides is a valid view, in my opinion, even although I don't agree with it.

I'm afraid I can't extend the same respect to someone who tells me the Queen is chosen by God, isn't like all those foreign monarchs, can't abdicate because she made a promise 70 years ago and that I hate her because she's rich.

Volver I definitely do not think that our monarchs are chosen by God.

Any monarch can abdicate if they choose, I don’t think HM will though. I think that Prince Charles and Prince William will just take over HM’s outside duties and she will continue with Zoom.

As for not being like all those foreign monarchs I wouldn’t mind betting that a bit of Googling will find that a lot of the Royal Houses are distantly related.

Honeysuckleberries

Do we need to replace the monarchy with a President? Couldn’t we manage with neither?

How exactly do you think having no head of state would work?

All the things I mentioned have been said on this forum GG13.

Such as, "other countries' monarchs may abdicate, but ours just don't do that"

I have always thought what is the point of this one family being given so much power privilege what have they done to deserve it? What do they do for the country for its people when you can see they are only there for themselves for their own interests which has been proven in many ways. Our history is varied many great inventions writers ect. What has monarchy done?

A British H o S would be a parliamentary republic something like we have now but made democratic from top to bottom. A president would have a role in defending our constitution something monarchy can't do.

volver

All the things I mentioned have been said on this forum GG13.

Such as, "other countries' monarchs may abdicate, but ours just don't do that"

I am beginning to think that I may be verging on being far too reasonable time to go and give my head a wobble and find the rebel within ??

Grany

I have always thought what is the point of this one family being given so much power privilege what have they done to deserve it? What do they do for the country for its people when you can see they are only there for themselves for their own interests which has been proven in many ways. Our history is varied many great inventions writers ect. What has monarchy done?

A British H o S would be a parliamentary republic something like we have now but made democratic from top to bottom. A president would have a role in defending our constitution something monarchy can't do.

Wouldn’t we need to have a written constitution for that to work?

GrannyGravy13

Grany

I have always thought what is the point of this one family being given so much power privilege what have they done to deserve it? What do they do for the country for its people when you can see they are only there for themselves for their own interests which has been proven in many ways. Our history is varied many great inventions writers ect. What has monarchy done?

A British H o S would be a parliamentary republic something like we have now but made democratic from top to bottom. A president would have a role in defending our constitution something monarchy can't do.

Wouldn’t we need to have a written constitution for that to work?

Oh please. We do have a written constitution and this was thrashed out only a few days ago.

Perhaps you would like to show proof that we don't?