Should the Monarchy be abolished?
 

Not sure if this topic has ever been debated, apologies if it has.

If not, let's discuss. Should Britain do away with the Royal Family (not in a murderous sense :hugesmile:) and have a President, rather than Prime Minister?

I can see that the Royals do bring an awful lot of revenue in with tourists etc, but they are also a huge drain with all the hangers on and the ridiculous lavish lifestyles for the flip side of the coin. I suppose I'd say on the whole, don't get rid of them altogether, but cut it right down, why should cousins, second cousins, aunts, uncles, etc etc, get given money and homes for just being born into THAT family.

I admit right of the bat that I'm not highly informed in politics, so my views may be somewhat naive, but I'd be interested to read all your opinions on the subject? :)

Yes. Inherited legislative power (however little), and its accompanying wealth, is ridiculous and draconic.

I can never make my mind up on this.

I mean the radical part of me wants to abolish it and introduce a republic because, its quite backward and elitist.

But then another part of me doesn't want to end 1000s of years of tradition and cut off the Royals as a tourist attraction. :suspect:

damm, meant to add a poll. Yay or Nay.

Public/private poll?

I usually make my polls public, so public please Vicky.

cheers.

Voted yay in the poll, because I actually can't stand the majority of the royals tbh, Prince Phillip wants a good hard kick in the balls for a start, Charles and Camilla are bastards (poor Diana, how she suffered).

Against it in principle, in practice I'm indifferent

Hmm on second thought I'd have to say I'd abolish it. I just started thinking about Prince Charles and the way that bastard meddles in governmental affairs (for the worse) really does make my blood boil, so. -votes yay-

get rid! And 99% of the house of lords too :)

If it means snatching Camilla (or the Wicked Witch as my nan calls her :laugh:) away from her pedestal then yes I'm all for it.

The thing with the tourism argument is that:

a) the history would still be there. It's not like tourists around the world would go "Oh the Queen ain't there any more? Well idfc about Buckingham Palace then."
b) if the entirety of London was bombed by a nuclear warhead, in about 100 years once the fallout dissipated it'd become a tourist site. Tourism =/= moral soundness.

Yes, completely and utterly.

The only reason it's kept is because England want it so it looks like they're 'proper' and stuff like that, when all it does is give off the stereotype that British people are dull and worship the Queen when infact, we act like Simon Cowell has more relevance than the Queen.

It means nothing, it's pointless, just get rid of it.

leave it!

Oh snap I picked the wrong vote, I should have picked Nay, didn't read the question properly urgh.
Anyway no we should not abolish them because they are a national icon, they boost tourism and plus I like them :thumbs:

On what planet do people think we all worship the Queen? Most people seem to know it's all bollocks and only kept for traditions sake.
In reality, the entire Royal Family don't hold very much power at all. Most of what they did have was taken away.

Nay for me, I have my disillusioned periods with the Monarchy but I still support it and doubt I would want to ever see the UK go to a Presidential system.

In fact,watching the State opening of Parliament today made me feel quite proud of our Country that we have such as this still going on.

Imagine having a President Blair, a President Thatcher or someone like them,no thank you, they can be Prime Ministers such people but I for one will always want to keep the Monarchy even with its faults,over a President any day.

The queen makes no decisions... Do you think th PM has to run everything by her he does?.
I think all the pomp and ceremony is ridiculous. Herand her entourage are just a drain, we would have tourists without her.

No I like having the Royal family :amazed: its the only thing Britain is known for..

We should be done with Priministers though, i'd rather have a President

TBH, most of the Royal Family's money and property were taken by the government a long time ago. They're very much a business now and are required to pay taxes. The money they give back to the state outweigh the money they take from it. And I'm pretty sure the American taxpayers pay much more towards the expenses of their First families than we do for the Royals.

We can't though because we have a Queen :laugh:
-I think-

Tourists worship the Queen more than us :tongue:

America.

Lol, I think they worship her more than we do. She doesn't even run the country in the strictest sense.

No kizzy,of course I don't think the PM has to run things past the Queen,in fact I know he doesn't but if we don't have a monarchy then we would have a President and quite frankly when I look at the often chaos over the water,also the politicians we get as leaders,I say no thank you to that.

The Monarchy has no power that is true but the Royal family bring in loads of income from tourists and I cannot for the life of me see where say,a President Blair,President Brown,President Thatcher or President Cameron would generate that income. Far from it but that is what we would get, Parties with leaders who would become President with all the funding that would entail too.

I personally love the pomp and ceremony,it is something unique we have, outdated maybe but it is like history coming alive.

For me anyway,long may it continue, I am at present 20 years old but I cannot see the monarchy being abolished in my lifetime and I certainly hope it won't be either.
I would never vote to abolish it and I doubt really,especially with William and Harry likely to be at the forefront of the Royals for decades to come,that the UK would in a referendum vote to abolish it either.

Nay, I agree with Joeysteele... I personally think it's a part of british culture, however outdated. The attention / tourism/ unity the Kate/ Wills wedding brought to the Uk, never mind the extra bank holidays (+Jubilee), makes them still relevant I think

That was a dramatic turn around in the poll

Sorry bollo I don't believe the royal wedding brought any unity to the UK...At all.
And if you guage your commitment to the monarchy by the number of holidays per year, my guess is they are not so much sovereignty more novelty.
But it seems to be a theme, maybe those further south feel more 'connected' to the ideal of royalty?...

Each to their own Kizzy...I guess I'm just going by the amount of people I know that got together to watch it /celebrate it with family and friends and got all nostalgic..and no I don't have a massive commitment really to them... just a lot of things they helped create I have got enjoyment out of in the past...art exhibits, museums, castles, chelsea flower show...heck even the D of E! Not sure about the Southern thing though..I have family and friends that aren't from the South that don't mind having them around...I guess I'd rather they were around than not...but I understand why people don't like them

I might mean something to English people but not sure about Britain as a whole.

It says a lot about how much people cared about the royal wedding when the most-talked-about subject was Pippa Middleton's arse.

I just don't see the need for them. There's nothing admirable about a bunch of out-of-touch privileged racists in some fancy buildings. And before anyone claims the amount of charity work they do - so do volunteers in Oxfam, but you don't see those getting diplomatic trips to the Caribbean.

The Royal wedding pulled a lot of the UK together definately Bollo, I know of students friends and family from abroad too who came over just to say they were there when the wedding took place.All of my family for instance loved every minute and many of them went to London at the time to catch a glimpse of things too.
I guess I am a Royalist really,I like the continuity the Monarchy represents in an ever changing World, it is something that is ours and it is loved and actually respected by great numbers of people in other countries.

Of course tourism would continue if we hadn't a Monarchy but not on the same scale I believe, a great many tourists flock to Balmoral for instance,when they know the Queen is there, just hoping to catch a glimpse of her maybe going to Church, the same with all the other Royal residences, with no monarchy though, the numbers would in my view likely fall quite heavily with the knowledge none of the Royals were there now.

For me the question is, would we as a Nation want someone like President Cameron for instance as a absolute leader,I sure wouldn't.
The Monarch may have no power,but I would guess PMs do draw on her vast experience of the UK and the World on a fair few issues,not as policy but as a sounding board.

Parliament wll always be there but it is strengthened and complimented by the continuity the Monarch brings to things as well.

Everything Shaun said.. :worship:

Serious question, is it possible for this to actually happen anytime soon?

I think the new wave of Royals like Will, Kate Harry etc'll make it more interesting/try get in touch more with society if that makes sense

I really hope that is the case nathan, out of all of them I feel wills may be a positive force in the royal line. His influence could do much more for the country than a set of dusty old relics wheeled out for the 2o'clock show for the visiting public.

Yeah this has been brought up a few times, I started a thread on it a few months back I think :p

A bit like MTVN said, against them in principle, but in practice I think as a result of tourism they're quite beneficial. I think we'd be a lot worse off without them. I found this which is a blog explaining 'the real cost of the royal family'. I found it quite interesting.

In an ideal world they wouldn't exist, but then in an ideal world everyone would be equal and elitism on the whole would be non-existent.

Yeah, they seem to have bit more of a humour and have been exposed to real life situations more as opposed to alot of sheltered Royals who just live on their titles for most of their life

Yeah, it's a tough one for for a former revolutionary anarchist, but nowadays I'd rather keep the monarchy who, by and large, pay for themselves, and shoot the bankers and brokers, who are just parasites ..... :cool:

Well ..... it WAS perfect ..... :pipe:

Deffo, he has his mothers humility. Coming from a broken home...Experiencing the death of a parent, his father marrying a horse (not SJP the other one)...It shapes a young man.

"Nay" to that ..... :eek: