There are many people in this country who think we should be a republic. Not everybody, granted, not even a majority of people. And there are lots of things for us to worry about right now. However that doesn’t mean we need to stop talking about it.
Having a monarch means that some person gets that job just because of who their mum/dad was. Most people seem happy for that to continue. But I think that some people who espouse that maybe don’t understand that it's not just that we want to have an election every few years to replace the King with another person, it's that we want a more modern and representative governance system for this country.
A HoS isn’t about just sitting in a gold coach or waving on the way to open the latest community centre. It's not about being the figurehead for a charity they have decided to support – they can do that as much as they like. But what they can’t (won’t?) do at the moment is intervene to prevent the government breaking the rules they were elected to uphold. Governments can lie to the Queen, try to impose policies that fewer than 1% of the country have voted for or approved, and try to change the rules of Parliament to suit themselves and their supporters. (Owen Patterson). And the King does nothing about it. Whether that’s by law or by precedent, I don’t know. But there are things above politics that need to be controlled, otherwise we end up being an out-of-control kleptocracy.
Now people can pop up and say we’ve had this for hundreds of years and its always worked. To those people I say – have you read the news lately? People can tell us how much tourism income they bring. Well, they bring about as much as we spend on them, and an ROI of 1 isn’t that great in business. They bring joy to people? So does Strictly. If we can get an inherited HoS to do all those things, then stick with it. But any move at all to protect the people of this country is seen as "interfering in politics". The King can't even go to COP27.
In my view, we need to grow up as a country. I’m sure others will differ.
maddyone
I don’t mind being agreed with or indeed disagreed with, but I don’t particularly like posters commenting on my posts and drawing the wrong conclusions from them. So long as what I have said is properly understood then I feel okay about posters agreeing or disagreeing with what I’ve said.
Hear hear!
No one should make comments about levels of education.
The wealth of private citizens is a different matter to that of RF.
William's £20m is not inherited wealth. It's an annual income. From a system set up by Edward 111 a long time ago. 1337!
To be distinguished from Edward the Traitor who was a twentieth century monarch and not from the same lineage . Edward 111 was one of the great Plantagenet kings.
Plantaganet
Edward VIII Britain's Traitor King
TV program
For the first time the extent of the Duke of Windsor's treachery during World War II is revealed, not just sympathising with the enemy but, as new evidence reveals, actively collaborating.
Volver wrote:
"One person said she though republicans were better educated. Others immediately disagreed with her."
It's only an impression. For instance one of my sons whose political education is superior to mine is a republican. He has a theory about how the British monarchy system helps to perpetuate social class divisions but I have forgetten the argument.
Grany, the late Duke of Windsor was an oddball. Most of the Windsor family are very ordinary, apart from their wealth.
Caleo
Volver wrote:
"One person said she though republicans were better educated. Others immediately disagreed with her."
It's only an impression. For instance one of my sons whose political education is superior to mine is a republican. He has a theory about how the British monarchy system helps to perpetuate social class divisions but I have forgetten the argument.
You should learn from your son he is right.
NEIL Mackay's argument that a conversation about the abolition of the monarchy is long overdue is both eloquent and veracious (“We need to talk about abolishing the monarchy”, The Herald July 2 and Letters, July 3). His contention that the monarchy is incompatible with equality is unerringly accurate. The existence of a Royal Family, with countless hangers-on, perpetuates class divisions in 21st century British society to the extent that these anachronistic divisions become socially accepted and even celebrated.
With the economic uncertainties and constitutional disorientation fuelled by Brexit, together with the re- emergence of a pugnacious and reckless form of English nationalism, it is clear to many that an unthinking acceptance of, or deference to, the institution of the monarchy can no longer be tolerated. Like Mr Mackay, I struggle to find any argument in favour of retaining the monarchy and believe that the Royal Family are an embarrassing and expensive burden to modern British society. Tourism of a historic nature would continue to flourish without them as it does in the republic of France.
Our present-day monarchy masquerades as historical tradition but in truth is a business enterprise which owes its favoured status to the British taxpayer. The cost of maintaining “the Firm”, as Mr Mackay observes, is wholly unacceptable at a time when food banks proliferate amidst a rise in real poverty, particularly amongst those families on low incomes. Figures released by Buckingham Palace last month inform us that the price of having a monarchy last year rose by approximately 44 per cent, meaning that £67 million was lavished on private jets, trains, trips abroad, refurbishment of ostentatious homes and palaces and on literally thousands of camp followers.
The present Conservative Government which has carried out the worst case of self-harm in British history by plunging us into the Brexit morass is largely a product of Oxbridge privilege and birthright entitlement that is enabled by the very existence of a Royal Family and institutionalised inequality. As Mr Mackay succinctly put it, “monarchy murders meritocracy”.
www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/17748310.existence-monarchy-perpetuates-unwelcome-class-divisions/
The Crown estates is state owned and money to fund monarchy is provided by the treasury
No one could argue with your last post Grany.
Mollygo
Grany it doesn’t matter. You don’t like the monarchy.
With extremely bad manners and no proof or justification except your own bitterness, you and others who want a republic are rude, and cast aspersions about the education level, of those who do like the monarchy or those who don’t see a republic as the solution to all the country’s problems like you do.
I don’t see those people being rude about would be republicans.
I wish I had more money. I could do a lot with it, but I don’t begrudge or covet what others have in the same way that you do, just because they belong to a family that you don’t like.
Your comment " I don't see those people being rude about would be republicans" after your insults preceding that are wonderfully ironic 
Can you put aside your " liking" of the personalities of the RF and tell us why you think the system of monarchy better serves the people than a republican system would?
Oh now I get it.
When we are a republic there will be:
1. no upper, middle and working classes because only the monarchy promotes the class system* ??
2. no incredibly rich people who will inevitably have more means to be in control of what happens That evidently won’t happen in republics will it?
3. no poor people, because the rich will all be happily sharing their wealth. whether newly inherited or set in place by their ancestors.
4. no Royal Family for republicans to blame for all that’s wrong in the UK
Well one out of four will be true, so I suppose it’s a start.
Waits expectantly for grany to jump in and ridicule monarchists’ education status again because they don’t agree with her.
It’s not even that I’m particularly pro monarchy or anti republican, but some republicans are so rude about monarchists that it gives such a bad impression of what being a republican means.
Would I want to live under the regime of republicans like some on GN?
Get rid of the monarchy and
Families from council housing estates will be invited to dinner
with families in private estates.
All council accommodations will have garages for the cars they
will be able to afford.
No private health care for those who now choose it.
All public schools will be closed
People in country estates will permit house building on their
land.
No holiday homes, build more holiday camps and caravan
sites.
All flights will be economy class.
This is all very silly.
I just deleted a whole screed about educated debate versus unsubtantiated ranting. Best not to post it, I thought
Monarchy is an outdated, archaic relic of feudalism, which went out with the medieval era. Modern societies reward people for what they do, not who they are by birth or marriage. The kind of “good work” some people say the “royals” do amounts to making public appearances and photo ops–not exactly hard work. The opportunity to do such work should be open to everyone, not determined by heredity.
blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/abolish-the-monarchy-child/
*volver Sun 23-Oct-22 12:21:12
This is all very silly.*
I agree volver. I don't like it when people twist what another person says to make the argument look ridiculous.
No one is saying all will be milk and honey with a republic: what we will have is a step in the right direction towards a more equal and cohesive society.
Modern societies reward people for what they do.
No they don’t- and that’s the problem. Nothing to do with the monarchy or republics.
Carers, nurses, mental health nurses who do an incredibly good and increasingly important job get ‘rewarded’ with less than footballers or TV ‘personalities’. Or maybe you think what they do is more important than the groups I mentioned.
You can rightly blame that on politics, but abolishing the monarchy won’t change that. It’s just easier to blame the RF.
Oh sorry Volver dear,
* Modern societies reward people for what they do.*
Jane71
*volver Sun 23-Oct-22 12:21:12
This is all very silly.*
I agree volver. I don't like it when people twist what another person says to make the argument look ridiculous.
No one is saying all will be milk and honey with a republic: what we will have is a step in the right direction towards a more equal and cohesive society.
Good post Jane71.
The RF does perpetuate the class system but I am cautious about replacing a constitutional monarchy with a republic and a president. In another world we might have Margaret Thatcher as President or Tony Blair or another superannuated PM. Liz Truss anyone? Boris Johnson? Perhaps Nigel Farage? Or a celebrity like David Beckham. What powers might they have: Macron is able to rule by decree, effectively bypassing the French Assembly.
In this world, we have a king who has been publicly humiliated and ridiculed throughout his life. Still, to follow the pro monarchy argument, better the devil you know seems to make the status quo acceptable. If Charles stood for election I wouldn't vote for him as Head of State.
Grantanow
The RF does perpetuate the class system but I am cautious about replacing a constitutional monarchy with a republic and a president. In another world we might have Margaret Thatcher as President or Tony Blair or another superannuated PM. Liz Truss anyone? Boris Johnson? Perhaps Nigel Farage? Or a celebrity like David Beckham. What powers might they have: Macron is able to rule by decree, effectively bypassing the French Assembly.
A parlimentary president with limited powers to uphold our countries constitutional laws.
Republic supports the replacement of the monarch with an elected head of state.
The kind of head of state we think is best for Britain is a 'ceremonial' or 'constitutional' position, someone chosen by the people to:
represent the nation
defend our democracy
act as referee in the political process
offer a non-political voice at times of crisis and celebration
More information here
www.republic.org.uk/what_we_want
Macron is able to rule by decree, effectively bypassing the French Assembly.
Macron is the head of government. Truss tried to bypass Parliament and Johnson did it often.
The Head of State is not necessarily the Head of Government.
This has been explained time and again.
Countries that have kings and queens, but still have free elections are called constitutional monarchies. These are similar to republics since the constitution has been amended to remove power from the monarchy. The United Kingdom is an example of a constitutional monarchy
What some republicans seem to focus on is that those they don’t like should not have anything that has been theirs for generations.
I studied at Uni how that happened in one country, but it’s noticeable that that country still has its class system, even unspoken, its incredibly rich and its incredibly poor.
I’m not sure those at the bottom, see it as a more equal and cohesive society though I’m sure those safely at the top would argue that it is. They’ve been trying it out for over 2 centuries.
What sort of a republic out of the different types do you think we would be?
I'd prefer an elected President.
Here's a list of presidents who are awful. They're all Heads of Government, but that doesn't matter, does it? I don't really understand the difference between that and HoS, you see...
I'd prefer a system that doesn't reinforce an unequal class system.
There's a country that I'm not going to name that is still unequal even though they've been a republic for 2 centuries! So that's a useless argument!!
I'd like to my country to be one where you don't get a job for life, overseeing the governance of a country, and extensive wealth, just because of who your parents are.
You're just jealous!.
It would be better if everyone was subject to the same tax regime.
Communist!!!
We could have a better HoS and system of government, if we really thought about it.
At least he's not an ayatollah!!
We could have a HoS we vote for that represents all the people.
Oh, not more of that democracy business thank you! We can't be trusted you know!!
I paraphrase.
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
