• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Royal Family

Darat said:
Seriously - how?
Click to expand...

Well she did serve in WW2 - And is famous for finding ways to save a dollar. With all the people and resources around her, she still insisted in repairing her own Land Rover till she was into her 60's
 
Border Reiver said:
You've also got to consider that not only the UK, but also the political systems of many other nations use Liz and family as heads of state (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc) and any removal causes a rather large and cumbersome ripple effect across a large swath of countries political, and legal systems.

It's a little more complicated than just changing the drapes.

Not to mention that I've grown fond of my Captain-General over the years.
Click to expand...

And she does rule at the pleasure of the people. The UK has never been bashful in the past with removing monarchs that dont find an affinity for. I can not speak for Canada, but the mood in Australia seems to be, once our current Queen passes, we wont take up Charles as her heir to the throne
 
Undesired Walrus said:
How is that any worse than King Charles III or Queen Beatrice?
Click to expand...

Let's suppose that it's not. Why throw away hundreds of years of tradition in order to get something that isn't any better?

Blue Bubble said:
Oh I don't know ... Germany seems to be quite successful with their choices of Head of State. See President of GermanyWP.
Click to expand...

Okay.. nearly zero :p His predecessor wasn't quite so illustrious, I'd suggest.

MG1962 said:
The UK has never been bashful in the past with removing monarchs that dont find an affinity for.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure that's true; when was the last one? Charles I I guess- and there was plenty of self loathing and recanting that followed that.
 
Last edited:
richardm said:
Let's suppose that it's not. Why throw away hundreds of years of tradition in order to get something that isn't any better?



Okay.. nearly zero :p His predecessor wasn't quite so illustrious, I'd suggest.



I'm not so sure that's true; when was the last one? Charles I I guess- and there was plenty of self loathing and recanting that followed that.
Click to expand...

It was James II and VII, when they called in William of Orange.
 
Dawkins is a republican. For what it's worth.

Ryokan said:
Why ask only the Brits? The rest of European monarchies not good enough for you?
Click to expand...

I agree... I'm personally a republican, but it's not a very big thing for me. Our current royal line will probably die out sooner or later as those in the past have, though I doubt it will happen in my lifetime.

There are some weird laws surrounding our monarchy. The monarch must be a Protestant Christian, for instance.
 
Damien Evans said:
It was James II and VII, when they called in William of Orange.
Click to expand...
Ah yes - still, I would suggest that he just represented a bit of tidying-up after his father, and it's been 320-odd years since then, which implies a reasonable case for saying "You're stuck with them" since then.

MG1962 said:
Edward VIII in Dec 1936
Click to expand...

Mm. He did decide to go off his own bat though, he wasn't chucked out on his ear - had he tried to stay and keep his missus, I suppose he may have been. Actually just before him Victoria had a few rickety years where it looked as though she might be pensioned off as well, and that's probably the closest we've had to a monarch being unwillingly ejected.

So I guess MG makes a not unfair point, but I'd still think that more monarchs have survived pressure for eviction than not, no matter how strident the population get when the chips are down.

Perhaps part of the skill of being a monarch is making sure the chips stay up, as Bernard might have put it.
 
Blue Bubble said:
Oh I don't know ... Germany seems to be quite successful with their choices of Head of State. See President of GermanyWP.
Click to expand...
I thought so too when I grew up and Richard von Weizsäcker was president. Most choices are heavily politicized and both big parties insist on bringing their own candidates, sometimes against better advice - as with the former president who had to resign, though the then-SPD candidate would also have been a good candidate for the CDU (and now is elected).

They're not nearly as bad, though, as who would get the job with a popular vote.
 
Ryokan said:
Why ask only the Brits? The rest of European monarchies not good enough for you?
Click to expand...
To put in my 2 cents: I like the idea of a symbolic figurehead as head of state; someone whose core job it is to cut ribbons and hold trite speeches.

When it comes to the question who that shall be, I shudder to think of what a popular vote might bring about; either the worst scum among ex-politicians, or, well, a clown like Frans Bauer. Germany's tradition isn't actually that bad in that respect.

So, while I'm no monarchist at all, our current setup with a constitutional monarchy isn't bad at all, as long as our king/queen is reasonable person (and/or has good advisers). And well, there's some good news last week: our parliament has decided to take matters into their own hand when it comes to forming a new (coalition) government and not rely on the queen to appoint a negotiator - this was actually the biggest influence our queen had on politics, and it was merely tradition, not constitutionally prescribed.
 
richardm said:
Trouble is that if it isn't heriditary then you have zero chance of making the appointment apolitical.
Click to expand...

Blue Bubble said:
Oh I don't know ... Germany seems to be quite successful with their choices of Head of State. See President of GermanyWP.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately you are overlooking the fact that this is Britain we're talking about. Our politicians are the best in the world at sniffing out sinecures.

For all the republicans say we could have a non-political, figurehead head of state (like the RoI), you can bet that with a title like 'President' up for grabs, presumably with a good salary, large house in the country and regular state dinners, our public servants would find a way to exclude the hoi polloi and keep it for themselves.
 
Not a Brit. I am an American monarchist, I guess. I think a constitutional monarchy is the best form of government outside of me as a benign dictator. I wish that is what we had in the U.S., as I have said before in other threads. Having a head of state outside of politics and the accompanying acrimony would be a great thing. Someone everyone, regardless of party, can see as the symbol of the country. I think the Brits would be foolish to get rid of a system that seems to work and earns respect from many others.
 
Strangely, while being the only atheist in the family, I am the one who belts out 'God Save the Queen' very time it comes on. The Royal Family, IMHO, is part of the heritage of UK, (just like the American Revolution is in the USA), and I respect them, though I would not be able to explain why.

They are part of my Great Britain, they are my Royal Family and that's that.
 
MG1962 said:
Well she did serve in WW2 - And is famous for finding ways to save a dollar. With all the people and resources around her, she still insisted in repairing her own Land Rover till she was into her 60's
Click to expand...

Brenda knows how to fix a Land Rover? Seriously?!:boggled:
 
23_Tauri said:
Brenda knows how to fix a Land Rover? Seriously?!:boggled:
Click to expand...

Yeah she was a member of the W.A.T.S during the war once she turned 18. She was trained as a driver and mechanic. There is a photo floating around somewhere of her changing the tire on a ambulance from the era
 
While I think the idea of hereditary royalty is absurd beyond words, I will concede one point. When used properly, the royal family can be used as an effective symbol in times of distress - e.g. during WW II, when the Cabinet suggested to the Queen Mother that her children (Elizabeth and Margaret) be sent to Canada for safety, she said "The children won't go without me. I won't leave the King. And the King will never leave."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom