The Harry and Meghan fuss

[west didsblue]

Like the argument to get rid of the monarchy by installing 3rd in line to the throne as king?

It certainly would be more than unusual having a 7 year old girl as king.

 

[Bill Walker]

I'm not sure there would be much point beyond an exercise in public flagellation. If some workplace training type thinks they can deliver a half day package to the monarchy that will educate them out of the actually very conscious bias of their privilege, background and history I'd be most impressed.
To accept the concept of monarchy you have got to accept the entitlement/ unfairness of an accident of birth. I think you accept it as the archaic ceremonial institution it is with all its flaws, or support abolishment. Most folk calling for reform seem to actually be after a republic once you scratch below the surface.

Surely getting rid of the monarchy would be as impossible as getting rid of guns in the USA.
There's just too many Daily Mail readers.

 

[metalblue]

Mods, mods! I'm being cyber-bullied by someone pretending to be my intellectual superior, just because he/she/it can do so with impunity.

Fucking yawnsville

Have you thought about writing a book about it? I heard it’s all the rage these days

 

[inbetween]

Surely getting rid of the monarchy would be as impossible as getting rid of guns in the USA.
There's just too many Daily Mail readers.

The vast majority of people are in favour of the monarchy, it's part of our identity and it's definitely part of our history (obviously). It has nothing to do with Daily Mail readers as though those who read the Daily Mail are in favour and those who don't are not. I don't read the Daily Mail and I'm in favour of the monarchy.

An alternative is to turn the UK into a republic but that doesn't have any benefits either. People constantly confuse their brand of politics on this issue but a republic would put us on a similar ground to a place like the US. Politics in the US is so poisonous and pointless that if that happened I would rather abolish the political system and have the monarchy instead.

The vast majority of the population does not participate in politics and is not interested in making the UK a republic to somehow benefit politics.

The irony on here is when people ask whether they have more in common with the royal family or agree with the social and political views of King Charles compared to the Tories? The answer is clear so why would we want to abolish the monarchy in favour of subsuming all power to our bankrupt political system?

 

[domalino]

The vast majority of people are in favour of the monarchy

No, it's 60% in favour of keeping the monarchy, about 50% in every demographic except conservative voters (82%) and Brexit voters (74%)

it's part of our identity and it's definitely part of our history (obviously).

So was the Empire, the British Navy ruling the waves and the industrial revolution, but times change.

An alternative is to turn the UK into a republic but that doesn't have any benefits either. People constantly confuse their brand of politics on this issue but a republic would put us on a similar ground to a place like the US.

Yes, we'd be like the USA...or Germany, France, Italy, India, Ireland...or most countries that have left behind the medieval idea that God has appointed a specific family to rule over the people.

Even the commonwealth countries that still pander to the idea of a monarchy have a presidential figure that takes on all political roles and responsibilities because...the idea Charles Windsor should make those decisions based on his blood is beyond stupid.

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

I certainly think he got more truth interviewing Harry than this

Boris is such a liar a “compulsive liar” but the public are gullible who is really running the country I don’t know.
4 pound 50 pence for a little bottle of cough medicine in Tesco and the King wants a new gold coach because the old one is a uncomfortable ride. Public transport not good enough for royalty

 

[Metal Biker]

The vast majority of people are in favour of the monarchy, it's part of our identity and it's definitely part of our history (obviously). It has nothing to do with Daily Mail readers as though those who read the Daily Mail are in favour and those who don't are not. I don't read the Daily Mail and I'm in favour of the monarchy.

An alternative is to turn the UK into a republic but that doesn't have any benefits either. People constantly confuse their brand of politics on this issue but a republic would put us on a similar ground to a place like the US. Politics in the US is so poisonous and pointless that if that happened I would rather abolish the political system and have the monarchy instead.

The vast majority of the population does not participate in politics and is not interested in making the UK a republic to somehow benefit politics.

The irony on here is when people ask whether they have more in common with the royal family or agree with the social and political views of King Charles compared to the Tories? The answer is clear so why would we want to abolish the monarchy in favour of subsuming all power to our bankrupt political system?

I kind of prefer our Constitutional Monarchy to a full blown Republic.

Parliament is kept in check by the Monarchy and the Monarchy itself has no real political powers over the populous. It is there for one thing, to ensure the rights of its people are protected and that Parliament continues to uphold that duty. To have one 'elected' official gain a position of supreme power over the rest of us because of a majority vote? Nah, no thank you. We've seen how flawed democtracy can be in that regard, how easily corruptable it can be, that absolute power corrupts in republics around the world. If anything i'd also seek to reduce the status of the Prime Minister position which has been slowly trying to mold itself into a 'President-light' image with subsequent law changes and PM's taking the role.

Power is and always should be shared and a Republic with a President doesn't do that. Because if none of the candidates get your vote, you will end up with someone with supreme power over you who you didn't vote for or approve of which can cause disruption and chaos if a large enough group is opposed to it. How is that any different than a King assuming power through 'birthright'? Different methods, same outcome. We don't need to become a Republic, we just need proportional representation with our vote with a legitimately recognised option not to give support to either candidate and regional governments to directly address local issues.

 

[inbetween]

No, it's 60% in favour of keeping the monarchy, about 50% in every demographic except conservative voters (82%) and Brexit voters (74%)

I don't see how whether someone is a Conservative or Brexit voter is relevant. We don't split the country on every single issue by whether someone is a Tory voter, Brexit voter or votes for that bucket head guy.

60% generally are in favour, 77% of over 65's are in favour, 68% of 50-64 year olds are in favour and 56% of 25-49 year olds are in favour.

The only clear statistic that matters here is the vast majority are in favour and the republic movement has A LOT of work to do.

 

[domalino]

Parliament is kept in check by the Monarchy

No it isn't.

When was the last time the monarchy kept parliament in check? It didn't stop Johnson illegally proroguing parliament, literally one of the few instances of power the monarch is supposed to still have, and the Queen just waved it through.

 

[Metal Biker]

Boris is such a liar a “compulsive liar” but the public are gullible who is really running the country I don’t know.
4 pound 50 pence for a little bottle of cough medicine in Tesco and the King wants a new gold coach because the old one is a uncomfortable ride. Public transport not good enough for royalty

Why do footballers need supercars? Can't they get the Metrolink like the rest of us? *spits*
Why do politicians need expensive Rolls Royce's and Jaguars and second homes and expenses? Can't they pay for it out of their own pocket? *shakes revolutionary fist*

It'll put coachbuilders in work, creates a small piece of legacy that likely people will spend more money to witness, which just generates more money for our economy. Doesn't affect you, doesn't affect me, seriously, where is the problem? The cost of your medicine is down to your politicians and greedy profiteers, not Charlie Boy. And lets be honest, public transport isn't good enough for anybody, which is why most of us avoid using it whenever we can, but that's by the by.