He was stripped of everything and banished but for personal events.
But I think it will get worse for now as Charles likely feels even more strongly about getting rid.
The British Monarchy
- Thread starter west didsblue
- Start date
But I think it will get worse for now as Charles likely feels even more strongly about getting rid.
You've chosen a very bad example by going for a country that has a combined head of state + head of goernment.
The comparison you're looking for would be more like Macron & Borne in France or Steinmeier & Shulz in Germany.
An elected head of state that sits above the head of government.
In what way does it check or balance politicians?
That's what a head of state should do, provide a long term stable presence that isn't geared towards the next election and stops the government getting out of line.
The monarchy can't do that though, because it's sworn to not do anything political.
So when Boris Johnson illegally prorogues parliament to force through law, the Queen could not do anything.
When Boris Johnson made Lebedev a lord, the Queen could not do anything.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
What you say is true. But I think the thing politicians fear the most (admittedly not Boris) is being tried in the court of public opinion. I think the Monarchy is capable of influencing public opinion in a covert and subtle way and that puts pressure on politicians. I am not arguing against having a Head of State. It might be a smart move. But my point is that the whole political process needs to change and the Royals are only a small part of it.
Gremlin
Well-Known Member
Whoever has the role of head of state, by whatever system of government they get there, they are a human with human frailties. What matters is how they personally carry out the role. The monarchy has survived in this country because the Queen did it very well. If the new King does a sh*t job and annoys everyone then the monarchy probably won't last - we've chopped off the King's head in the past for taking the p*ss (not that I'm suggesting that would happen again).
One of the advantages of the current monarchy, in my opinion, is the apolitical nature of the role and the way it carries on as continuity and a point of reference despite frequent changes of government of different political persuasions (when you join the armed forces you swear allegiance to the monarch, not the Prime Minister who might be out of the door next week, even though the latter is the one actually giving the orders). I don't think you get that to the same extent with an elected head of state who changes every 5 years.
Now, don't get me wrong, I completely understand the 'anachronistic' and 'medieval' argument and, on the face of it, it may look a bit strange. But the balance so far seems to be very much in favour of keeping the status quo. However, a lot will depend on how the new King shapes up (as noted above) and that balance could change.
That is, perhaps, why there is a lot of grief about - because we are losing something that was stable and unwavering in period of change and adding yet more uncertainty into the mix.
Anyway, just my 2p.
hilts
Well-Known Member
People don't like some decisions, alert the church elders:-)
Cheadle_hulmeBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 19,399
There’s zero chance of that happening. It’s our history and identity. It’s so important to Britain.
You can clearly see from the outpouring worldwide how popular the queen was and I think lots will now be willing Charles to do a good job.
Protein Junkie
Well-Known Member
Great post !!
I mentioned yesterday the monarchy and of what puts the Great into Britain.
Yes of course Royalty has not behaved but to abolish it we need to be careful.
Oliver Cromwell was a right Cnut.
i'm not sure a modern Republic would be done in quite the same way as a 17th century militant did it....but i suppose you never do know!
i personally think the Great in Great Britain is the people, not the royal family. (even though it's just geographical).
Protein Junkie
Well-Known Member
Good points.
Some posters have referred to previous Kings behaviour so it works both ways. Personally would want to see what a Republic would look like first.
Of course it’s the people but that includes the monarchy.
I’m very proud to be British despite some of our past. My pride is based on factors of which History is not the sole consideration.
B
B
bluemc1
Guest
seeing a lot of Africans and people of African heritage on Twitter posting about mass murder and stealing diamonds and painting the Queen and Royals in a very bad light
Never heard about this, does anyone know what it’s referencing?
I can google it I know just seeing if anyone was knowledgeable about this
Never heard about this, does anyone know what it’s referencing?
I can google it I know just seeing if anyone was knowledgeable about this
Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
Earlier this year, Belgium started the process of handing back something like 8,000 artifacts in Belgian museums that were pillaged from its former colonies in Africa
Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
Prince William is now The Prince of Wales.
Should be interesting to see which national team he cheers for seeing as he is President of the English Football Association
Should be interesting to see which national team he cheers for seeing as he is President of the English Football Association
Why?
Just my opinion. I feel like the Queen was a high point on which to end a completely out is date, born to rule system. Plenty of other countries have managed to get over their monarchies.
urban genie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 May 2008
- Messages
- 35,143
More importanly does he know pegio is the welsh language name for his favourite pass time
GaudinoMotors
Well-Known Member
Belgium would.
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 70,489
Never seen Charles with a Welsh top on. He’ll be ok.
This would probably be a decent place to start if you wanted to learn about it.
Cullinan Diamond - Wikipedia
Why the fuck not?