Do we actually need the Royal family?

[smokey]

One other thing tho.. I can't remember it all fully and tbh this doesn't have much to do with the question but i find it interesting.. There is a certain time when the queen is allowed into parliament/commons. During that time there is a ceremonial door shut in her face as a sign that she has no right in parliament. Obviously it is staged as such but still.. What a funny country we live in!

Its called opening season, its not actually the queen that gets it slammed in her face but Black rod, her messenger.
The monarch hasn't been into the house of commons since 1642 so sends their messanger to to open the season of commons which gathers all the mps and lords together.
The door is slammed as a reminder that they have the right to exlude anyone but then is reopened to show acknowledgment that that exlusion doesn't apply to the soveriegns messengers.

The Queen does attend for ceremonial purpuses but doesn't actualy go int to the house of commons but instead remains elsewhere.
The part of the ceremony I find funny is when she travles their each year they have to send a MP as hostage to Buckingham palace to be flogged and beheaded if the monarch isn't returned
Its back from when the government and monarch didn't get along

Thanks I couldn't remember it all but I knew it was something like that.. Tbh I find stuff like that fascinating! Imagine an mp getting beheaded these days lol.... We are such a funny country at times no wonder all the tourists want to come..

Look up ceremony of the keys at the tower of London, That's one of my faverites

As with many events of ceremony in the United Kingdom, it takes some significant outside influence to interrupt the Ceremony of the Keys. The one time when the ceremony was interrupted was during the Second World War, when there was an air raid on London, and a number of incendiary bombs fell on the old Victorian guardroom just as the Chief Yeoman Warder and the escort were coming through the Bloody Tower archway. The shock and the noise of the bombs falling blew over the escort and the Chief Yeoman Warder, but they stood up, dusted themselves down, and carried on. The Tower holds a letter from the Officer of the Guard apologising to King George VI that the ceremony was late, along with a reply from the King which says that the officer is not to be punished as the delay was due to enemy action

taken from wiki.. How British! Very interesting thanks for that never heard of that.. Speaking of which the "keep calm" thing.. They were originally war posters from the 2nd? World war in reference to the bombs in London.. Simply stating that if u heard the siren and bombs would go you woul keep calm (go to bunkers etc) and afterwards carry on. Part of the great British spirit

Completely off topic but when I was in labour with LO the nurse said to me "you don't shout and scream much like most of them do you?" to which I replied with a growl "im British dammit, I just get on with it" (gotta love gas n air, makes you say the most stupid of things)

Love it! You earned you cup of tea! when I got my belly pierced I was told to "lie back and think of England" apparently they used to tell that to Victorian girls before they lost their virginity as obv it can be a little uncomfortable...

I had a ex that said that to me once, needless to say that's why he's an ex

 

[Natsku]

Love all the info in this thread - learnt a lot!
I can understand why some people would want to be rid of the Royal family for democratic reasons but Britain wouldn't be the same without them, all the ceremonies, the history of it all, I like it.

 

[hayz_baby]

One other thing tho.. I can't remember it all fully and tbh this doesn't have much to do with the question but i find it interesting.. There is a certain time when the queen is allowed into parliament/commons. During that time there is a ceremonial door shut in her face as a sign that she has no right in parliament. Obviously it is staged as such but still.. What a funny country we live in!

Its called opening season, its not actually the queen that gets it slammed in her face but Black rod, her messenger.
The monarch hasn't been into the house of commons since 1642 so sends their messanger to to open the season of commons which gathers all the mps and lords together.
The door is slammed as a reminder that they have the right to exlude anyone but then is reopened to show acknowledgment that that exlusion doesn't apply to the soveriegns messengers.

The Queen does attend for ceremonial purpuses but doesn't actualy go int to the house of commons but instead remains elsewhere.
The part of the ceremony I find funny is when she travles their each year they have to send a MP as hostage to Buckingham palace to be flogged and beheaded if the monarch isn't returned
Its back from when the government and monarch didn't get along

Thanks I couldn't remember it all but I knew it was something like that.. Tbh I find stuff like that fascinating! Imagine an mp getting beheaded these days lol.... We are such a funny country at times no wonder all the tourists want to come..

Look up ceremony of the keys at the tower of London, That's one of my faverites

As with many events of ceremony in the United Kingdom, it takes some significant outside influence to interrupt the Ceremony of the Keys. The one time when the ceremony was interrupted was during the Second World War, when there was an air raid on London, and a number of incendiary bombs fell on the old Victorian guardroom just as the Chief Yeoman Warder and the escort were coming through the Bloody Tower archway. The shock and the noise of the bombs falling blew over the escort and the Chief Yeoman Warder, but they stood up, dusted themselves down, and carried on. The Tower holds a letter from the Officer of the Guard apologising to King George VI that the ceremony was late, along with a reply from the King which says that the officer is not to be punished as the delay was due to enemy action

taken from wiki.. How British! Very interesting thanks for that never heard of that.. Speaking of which the "keep calm" thing.. They were originally war posters from the 2nd? World war in reference to the bombs in London.. Simply stating that if u heard the siren and bombs would go you woul keep calm (go to bunkers etc) and afterwards carry on. Part of the great British spirit

Completely off topic but when I was in labour with LO the nurse said to me "you don't shout and scream much like most of them do you?" to which I replied with a growl "im British dammit, I just get on with it" (gotta love gas n air, makes you say the most stupid of things)

Love it! You earned you cup of tea! when I got my belly pierced I was told to "lie back and think of England" apparently they used to tell that to Victorian girls before they lost their virginity as obv it can be a little uncomfortable...

I had a ex that said that to me once, needless to say that's why he's an ex

Can't say much for him then iykwim

 

[vaniilla]

Sorry, can't stand the royal family and what they stand for, the sycophancy around it is just ridiculous, and a little bit sickening that people are so happy to rejoice in the fact that somebody is in a high position through the pure accident of birth. It sums up our view on what's important in life pretty well - social status and money, the titles they give themselves are just ridiculous in the 21st century, leave the romance for the austen novel folks, funny how selective we can be with history in the face of pomp and parade.

 

[Foogirl]

I think it is crazy we have one thing that the UK is known fondly for, that people all over the world are in awe of and come here to visit us because of, and yet still people want to do it down. The Monarchy is one of the UK's most successful exports, why can't the UK just be happy about that?

And I really dislike the whole "class system" argument. Like if we got rid of the monarchy, that would disappear. Many countries have no "class system" but rich and poor, social status, are still very much determined by accident of birth. You don't need titles for privileges.

I'd also point out the tourists don't just go to London for the Royal stuff. Many places in Scotland benefit from Royal tourism too.

I'm not a royalist, I'm actually quite ambivalent about them, but I think it is important to understand what benefits they bring. They should also be respected for what they do. The senior members of the Royal Family work incredibly hard. The Queen and Prince Phillip carry out around 400 public engagements every year. They are 87 and 91 years old and yet still do things like stand on a barge for four hours in the cold, pissing rain, just so people can see them. Prince Charles did over 600 public engagements in 2011. He is 64 years old. If anyone thinks that doesn't deserve respect, just because they have a good standard of living, then I think that is what is wrong with society today.

 

[porkypig]

I think it is crazy we have one thing that the UK is known fondly for, that people all over the world are in awe of and come here to visit us because of, and yet still people want to do it down. The Monarchy is one of the UK's most successful exports, why can't the UK just be happy about that?

And I really dislike the whole "class system" argument. Like if we got rid of the monarchy, that would disappear. Many countries have no "class system" but rich and poor, social status, are still very much determined by accident of birth. You don't need titles for privileges.

I'd also point out the tourists don't just go to London for the Royal stuff. Many places in Scotland benefit from Royal tourism too.

I'm not a royalist, I'm actually quite ambivalent about them, but I think it is important to understand what benefits they bring. They should also be respected for what they do. The senior members of the Royal Family work incredibly hard. The Queen and Prince Phillip carry out around 400 public engagements every year. They are 87 and 91 years old and yet still do things like stand on a barge for four hours in the cold, pissing rain, just so people can see them. Prince Charles did over 600 public engagements in 2011. He is 64 years old. If anyone thinks that doesn't deserve respect, just because they have a good standard of living, then I think that is what is wrong with society today.

I'd stand in the pissing rain for 20 hours if it meant I had all their money and privileges in the bank! Lol yes I agree with you, they do have lots of Engagements they attend; standing around pretending to be interested must be really hard work! Lol if we were to give privileges/money/statuses/titles to 'normal' people who work really hard then there'd be a hell of a lot of rich and famous people walking around. I think they do deserve respect like anyone else I guess, but my original question was are they needed and apart from the tourism line or the charity one, I'm yet to be convinced xx

 

[Pearls18]

I think it is crazy we have one thing that the UK is known fondly for, that people all over the world are in awe of and come here to visit us because of, and yet still people want to do it down. The Monarchy is one of the UK's most successful exports, why can't the UK just be happy about that?

And I really dislike the whole "class system" argument. Like if we got rid of the monarchy, that would disappear. Many countries have no "class system" but rich and poor, social status, are still very much determined by accident of birth. You don't need titles for privileges.

I'd also point out the tourists don't just go to London for the Royal stuff. Many places in Scotland benefit from Royal tourism too.

I'm not a royalist, I'm actually quite ambivalent about them, but I think it is important to understand what benefits they bring. They should also be respected for what they do. The senior members of the Royal Family work incredibly hard. The Queen and Prince Phillip carry out around 400 public engagements every year. They are 87 and 91 years old and yet still do things like stand on a barge for four hours in the cold, pissing rain, just so people can see them. Prince Charles did over 600 public engagements in 2011. He is 64 years old. If anyone thinks that doesn't deserve respect, just because they have a good standard of living, then I think that is what is wrong with society today.

I'd stand in the pissing rain for 20 hours if it meant I had all their money and privileges in the bank! Lol yes I agree with you, they do have lots of Engagements they attend; standing around pretending to be interested must be really hard work! Lol if we were to give privileges/money/statuses/titles to 'normal' people who work really hard then there'd be a hell of a lot of rich and famous people walking around. I think they do deserve respect like anyone else I guess, but my original question was are they needed and apart from the tourism line or the charity one, I'm yet to be convinced xx

You're completely underestimating the work they do, would you really want to work until pretty much the day you die for all these privileges? I sure as hell won't be working in my 80s, Diana had to leave her children as babies to fulfil her role travelling around the world to these "engagements" I can't remember what they said but they work for most of the year (it's a lot of days can't remember how many) with very few days off.

I personally think they are more deserving of what they have than a lot of other people who are born with a silver spoons in their mouths, or these god awful celebrities like the Karadashians. They do not just inherit what they have, they work hard to do the role they have pushed onto them through no choice of their own, the pressure be would be horrid.

Would I want this for a few palaces? Heck no.

People can dislike the institution all they like, but this bitter jealousy of their social standing is misplaced I feel, it's how society is, even in Republics, if you want to aim for supposed social equality maybe look at communist states and see what you think of those.....

 

[pinkpolkadot]

I think it is crazy we have one thing that the UK is known fondly for, that people all over the world are in awe of and come here to visit us because of, and yet still people want to do it down. The Monarchy is one of the UK's most successful exports, why can't the UK just be happy about that?

And I really dislike the whole "class system" argument. Like if we got rid of the monarchy, that would disappear. Many countries have no "class system" but rich and poor, social status, are still very much determined by accident of birth. You don't need titles for privileges.

I'd also point out the tourists don't just go to London for the Royal stuff. Many places in Scotland benefit from Royal tourism too.

I'm not a royalist, I'm actually quite ambivalent about them, but I think it is important to understand what benefits they bring. They should also be respected for what they do. The senior members of the Royal Family work incredibly hard. The Queen and Prince Phillip carry out around 400 public engagements every year. They are 87 and 91 years old and yet still do things like stand on a barge for four hours in the cold, pissing rain, just so people can see them. Prince Charles did over 600 public engagements in 2011. He is 64 years old. If anyone thinks that doesn't deserve respect, just because they have a good standard of living, then I think that is what is wrong with society today.

I'd stand in the pissing rain for 20 hours if it meant I had all their money and privileges in the bank! Lol yes I agree with you, they do have lots of Engagements they attend; standing around pretending to be interested must be really hard work! Lol if we were to give privileges/money/statuses/titles to 'normal' people who work really hard then there'd be a hell of a lot of rich and famous people walking around. I think they do deserve respect like anyone else I guess, but my original question was are they needed and apart from the tourism line or the charity one, I'm yet to be convinced xx

You're completely underestimating the work they do, would you really want to work until pretty much the day you die for all these privileges? I sure as hell won't be working in my 80s, Diana had to leave her children as babies to fulfil her role travelling around the world to these "engagements" I can't remember what they said but they work for most of the year (it's a lot of days can't remember how many) with very few days off.

I personally think they are more deserving of what they have than a lot of other people who are born with a silver spoons in their mouths, or these god awful celebrities like the Karadashians. They do not just inherit what they have, they work hard to do the role they have pushed onto them through no choice of their own, the pressure be would be horrid.

Would I want this for a few palaces? Heck no.

People can dislike the institution all they like, but this bitter jealousy of their social standing is misplaced I feel, it's how society is, even in Republics, if you want to aim for supposed social equality maybe look at communist states and see what you think of those.....

I jumped in here a bit late sorry!

Just wanted to say I have read the whole thread and the Royal Family is something I have only quite recently gone from being quite indifferent to, to opposing (not personally, they can't help it, just the whole concept).

Most of my views have already been covered so I won't ramble (yet haha!)

MarineWAG your comment there did make me think but actually reinforces my view. Why should anyone have this life bestowed upon them (or be burdened with it, whichever way you wish to look at it) simply because they inherited it.

I also think it's unfair to say the only reason people detest their social standing is through jealousy, that is not the only reason to oppose elitism. Just because that is the way it is in plenty of countries doesn't make it OK or right. Historically the Royal Family are where they are through sheet brute force, does that mean it's OK to go and take anything we want by force and carry on and celebrate that tradition?

 

[Foogirl]

MarineWAG your comment there did make me think but actually reinforces my view. Why should anyone have this life bestowed upon them (or be burdened with it, whichever way you wish to look at it) simply because they inherited it.

I also think it's unfair to say the only reason people detest their social standing is through jealousy, that is not the only reason to oppose elitism. Just because that is the way it is in plenty of countries doesn't make it OK or right. Historically the Royal Family are where they are through sheet brute force, does that mean it's OK to go and take anything we want by force and carry on and celebrate that tradition?

Because that is the way the world works. Why should anyone be born in to a poor household? Or born into a family in the third world? Why should anyone be born to celebrity parents, or to billionaires who worked hard for their money? Heck, why on earth was I born in a country where it rains 350 days of the year when clearly I could have lived somewhere much warmer. Everyone is where they are by an "accident of birth" and that's just how it goes. Everybody inherits (or is burdened by) their life. What matters is what you do with that.

Sure Royal Families of old behaved badly, just as have many non royal leaders. Most countries have a sordid history of some sort. But having that past hasn't shaped their future and the modern Royal Family has evolved to put their past behind them and use their status for the good. You cannot blame one institution for the sins of their past. Successive British Presidents have built their power on taking things by sheer brute force, do we get rid of the House of Commons? It's ridiculous to suggest the Royal Family should not be there because, well, it's just not fair they were born in to it.

You could throw all the money and status in the world at me but there is absolutely no way I would swap my life for theirs.

I totally agree with Marine. The only alternative that would answer all the criticism is communism. And we've seen how well that works

 

[Foogirl]

I think they do deserve respect like anyone else I guess, but my original question was are they needed and apart from the tourism line or the charity one, I'm yet to be convinced xx

Do we need historic buildings? Or museums? Or theatres? Or Sculptures and statues?

Do we need TV? Or restaurants? Or football stadia? Or....well.....anything else we have in this Country which is provided for people to get enjoyment or entertainment?

Of course we don't NEED a Royal Family, but we've got one and really, do we NEED to spend what will no doubt be an exorbitant amount of money to replace our political system with a republican one? Will we be any better off because of it?

 

[pinkpolkadot]

MarineWAG your comment there did make me think but actually reinforces my view. Why should anyone have this life bestowed upon them (or be burdened with it, whichever way you wish to look at it) simply because they inherited it.

I also think it's unfair to say the only reason people detest their social standing is through jealousy, that is not the only reason to oppose elitism. Just because that is the way it is in plenty of countries doesn't make it OK or right. Historically the Royal Family are where they are through sheet brute force, does that mean it's OK to go and take anything we want by force and carry on and celebrate that tradition?

Because that is the way the world works. Why should anyone be born in to a poor household? Or born into a family in the third world? Why should anyone be born to celebrity parents, or to billionaires who worked hard for their money? Heck, why on earth was I born in a country where it rains 350 days of the year when clearly I could have lived somewhere much warmer. Everyone is where they are by an "accident of birth" and that's just how it goes. Everybody inherits (or is burdened by) their life. What matters is what you do with that.

Sure Royal Families of old behaved badly, just as have many non royal leaders. Most countries have a sordid history of some sort. But having that past hasn't shaped their future and the modern Royal Family has evolved to put their past behind them and use their status for the good. You cannot blame one institution for the sins of their past. Successive British Presidents have built their power on taking things by sheer brute force, do we get rid of the House of Commons? It's ridiculous to suggest the Royal Family should not be there because, well, it's just not fair they were born in to it.

You could throw all the money and status in the world at me but there is absolutely no way I would swap my life for theirs.

I totally agree with Marine. The only alternative that would answer all the criticism is communism. And we've seen how well that works

Yes of course you can't help what you are born into obviously, that is why I said previously that I don't oppose them personally, just the concept. Why do we insist on retaining a monarchy when we are supposed to live in a democracy when the two contradict each other?

How is it right that one person is eligible to be 'head of state' simply because of the family they were born into when every single other child born in the UK knows that they will never be able to attain this position on merit?

The house of commons is not the same thing at all, successive parties are voted in so they are not really linked to the acts of predecessors.

Communism? Well I guess I am bit of a lefty but just because I detest elitism doesn't make me a communist, after all I have to agree communism doesn't work.

 

[smokey]

I think it is crazy we have one thing that the UK is known fondly for, that people all over the world are in awe of and come here to visit us because of, and yet still people want to do it down. The Monarchy is one of the UK's most successful exports, why can't the UK just be happy about that?

And I really dislike the whole "class system" argument. Like if we got rid of the monarchy, that would disappear. Many countries have no "class system" but rich and poor, social status, are still very much determined by accident of birth. You don't need titles for privileges.

I'd also point out the tourists don't just go to London for the Royal stuff. Many places in Scotland benefit from Royal tourism too.

I'm not a royalist, I'm actually quite ambivalent about them, but I think it is important to understand what benefits they bring. They should also be respected for what they do. The senior members of the Royal Family work incredibly hard. The Queen and Prince Phillip carry out around 400 public engagements every year. They are 87 and 91 years old and yet still do things like stand on a barge for four hours in the cold, pissing rain, just so people can see them. Prince Charles did over 600 public engagements in 2011. He is 64 years old. If anyone thinks that doesn't deserve respect, just because they have a good standard of living, then I think that is what is wrong with society today.

I'd stand in the pissing rain for 20 hours if it meant I had all their money and privileges in the bank! Lol yes I agree with you, they do have lots of Engagements they attend; standing around pretending to be interested must be really hard work! Lol if we were to give privileges/money/statuses/titles to 'normal' people who work really hard then there'd be a hell of a lot of rich and famous people walking around. I think they do deserve respect like anyone else I guess, but my original question was are they needed and apart from the tourism line or the charity one, I'm yet to be convinced xx

You could argue though is anyone in this world "needed"? answer is no, your born, you either play your lot in life or you change it (for better or worse) then you die.

 

[smokey]

MarineWAG your comment there did make me think but actually reinforces my view. Why should anyone have this life bestowed upon them (or be burdened with it, whichever way you wish to look at it) simply because they inherited it.

I also think it's unfair to say the only reason people detest their social standing is through jealousy, that is not the only reason to oppose elitism. Just because that is the way it is in plenty of countries doesn't make it OK or right. Historically the Royal Family are where they are through sheet brute force, does that mean it's OK to go and take anything we want by force and carry on and celebrate that tradition?

Because that is the way the world works. Why should anyone be born in to a poor household? Or born into a family in the third world? Why should anyone be born to celebrity parents, or to billionaires who worked hard for their money? Heck, why on earth was I born in a country where it rains 350 days of the year when clearly I could have lived somewhere much warmer. Everyone is where they are by an "accident of birth" and that's just how it goes. Everybody inherits (or is burdened by) their life. What matters is what you do with that.

Sure Royal Families of old behaved badly, just as have many non royal leaders. Most countries have a sordid history of some sort. But having that past hasn't shaped their future and the modern Royal Family has evolved to put their past behind them and use their status for the good. You cannot blame one institution for the sins of their past. Successive British Presidents have built their power on taking things by sheer brute force, do we get rid of the House of Commons? It's ridiculous to suggest the Royal Family should not be there because, well, it's just not fair they were born in to it.

You could throw all the money and status in the world at me but there is absolutely no way I would swap my life for theirs.

I totally agree with Marine. The only alternative that would answer all the criticism is communism. And we've seen how well that works

Yes of course you can't help what you are born into obviously, that is why I said previously that I don't oppose them personally, just the concept. Why do we insist on retaining a monarchy when we are supposed to live in a democracy when the two contradict each other?

How is it right that one person is eligible to be 'head of state' simply because of the family they were born into when every single other child born in the UK knows that they will never be able to attain this position on merit?
The house of commons is not the same thing at all, successive parties are voted in so they are not really linked to the acts of predecessors.

Communism? Well I guess I am bit of a lefty but just because I detest elitism doesn't make me a communist, after all I have to agree communism doesn't work.

If you think about it though any person can bitch about how their parents where not richer or whatever when they where born, to think of yourself as worse off because you where not born into a royal family is as pointless as wishing you where born in a hotter country, to celebrities or 500 years ago.
I just don't get the argument of get ride of them because no one else can get that far in life, to me that's just a typical human downfull of bitterness, resentment and self sorrow of just because you cant accomplish it no one else should (of course I don't mean you personally just generaly speaking )

Plus its been shown now that what your born into is irrelevant, one commoner will be our future queen where as another king gave it all up to go live with the woman he loved.
Its the same as a poor person can make something of their life with education, hard work and a family just as a rich person can blow it all and die lonely

 

[deafgal]

Well, you can always vote for a president.

It seem it is human nature to crave some kind of leader

 

[smokey]

Well, you can always vote for a president.

It seem it is human nature to crave some kind of leader

I think its more a case of its human nature to crave someone to take responsability that we can moan about when it all doesnt go right.

 

[pinkpolkadot]

MarineWAG your comment there did make me think but actually reinforces my view. Why should anyone have this life bestowed upon them (or be burdened with it, whichever way you wish to look at it) simply because they inherited it.

I also think it's unfair to say the only reason people detest their social standing is through jealousy, that is not the only reason to oppose elitism. Just because that is the way it is in plenty of countries doesn't make it OK or right. Historically the Royal Family are where they are through sheet brute force, does that mean it's OK to go and take anything we want by force and carry on and celebrate that tradition?

Because that is the way the world works. Why should anyone be born in to a poor household? Or born into a family in the third world? Why should anyone be born to celebrity parents, or to billionaires who worked hard for their money? Heck, why on earth was I born in a country where it rains 350 days of the year when clearly I could have lived somewhere much warmer. Everyone is where they are by an "accident of birth" and that's just how it goes. Everybody inherits (or is burdened by) their life. What matters is what you do with that.

Sure Royal Families of old behaved badly, just as have many non royal leaders. Most countries have a sordid history of some sort. But having that past hasn't shaped their future and the modern Royal Family has evolved to put their past behind them and use their status for the good. You cannot blame one institution for the sins of their past. Successive British Presidents have built their power on taking things by sheer brute force, do we get rid of the House of Commons? It's ridiculous to suggest the Royal Family should not be there because, well, it's just not fair they were born in to it.

You could throw all the money and status in the world at me but there is absolutely no way I would swap my life for theirs.

I totally agree with Marine. The only alternative that would answer all the criticism is communism. And we've seen how well that works

Yes of course you can't help what you are born into obviously, that is why I said previously that I don't oppose them personally, just the concept. Why do we insist on retaining a monarchy when we are supposed to live in a democracy when the two contradict each other?

How is it right that one person is eligible to be 'head of state' simply because of the family they were born into when every single other child born in the UK knows that they will never be able to attain this position on merit?
The house of commons is not the same thing at all, successive parties are voted in so they are not really linked to the acts of predecessors.

Communism? Well I guess I am bit of a lefty but just because I detest elitism doesn't make me a communist, after all I have to agree communism doesn't work.

If you think about it though any person can bitch about how their parents where not richer or whatever when they where born, to think of yourself as worse off because you where not born into a royal family is as pointless as wishing you where born in a hotter country, to celebrities or 500 years ago.
I just don't get the argument of get ride of them because no one else can get that far in life, to me that's just a typical human downfull of bitterness, resentment and self sorrow of just because you cant accomplish it no one else should (of course I don't mean you personally just generaly speaking )

Plus its been shown now that what your born into is irrelevant, one commoner will be our future queen where as another king gave it all up to go live with the woman he loved.
Its the same as a poor person can make something of their life with education, hard work and a family just as a rich person can blow it all and die lonely

I know you were being general but as I can only speak for myself I certainly don't think of myself as worse off, I would hate to be a Royal and I am quite content with my lot.

My argument is that we are a democracy so the position of head of state should not be a birthright. They should be elected by the public. Anyone that wants to be the head of state should have the opportunity to put themselves forward for said postion no matter which family they happened to be born into/married into. I guess that makes me in favour of a republic.

If we didn't have a governement, just the Queen as our 'ruler' would that be OK?

 

[Pearls18]

MarineWAG your comment there did make me think but actually reinforces my view. Why should anyone have this life bestowed upon them (or be burdened with it, whichever way you wish to look at it) simply because they inherited it.

I also think it's unfair to say the only reason people detest their social standing is through jealousy, that is not the only reason to oppose elitism. Just because that is the way it is in plenty of countries doesn't make it OK or right. Historically the Royal Family are where they are through sheet brute force, does that mean it's OK to go and take anything we want by force and carry on and celebrate that tradition?

Because that is the way the world works. Why should anyone be born in to a poor household? Or born into a family in the third world? Why should anyone be born to celebrity parents, or to billionaires who worked hard for their money? Heck, why on earth was I born in a country where it rains 350 days of the year when clearly I could have lived somewhere much warmer. Everyone is where they are by an "accident of birth" and that's just how it goes. Everybody inherits (or is burdened by) their life. What matters is what you do with that.

Sure Royal Families of old behaved badly, just as have many non royal leaders. Most countries have a sordid history of some sort. But having that past hasn't shaped their future and the modern Royal Family has evolved to put their past behind them and use their status for the good. You cannot blame one institution for the sins of their past. Successive British Presidents have built their power on taking things by sheer brute force, do we get rid of the House of Commons? It's ridiculous to suggest the Royal Family should not be there because, well, it's just not fair they were born in to it.

You could throw all the money and status in the world at me but there is absolutely no way I would swap my life for theirs.

I totally agree with Marine. The only alternative that would answer all the criticism is communism. And we've seen how well that works

Yes of course you can't help what you are born into obviously, that is why I said previously that I don't oppose them personally, just the concept. Why do we insist on retaining a monarchy when we are supposed to live in a democracy when the two contradict each other?

How is it right that one person is eligible to be 'head of state' simply because of the family they were born into when every single other child born in the UK knows that they will never be able to attain this position on merit?
The house of commons is not the same thing at all, successive parties are voted in so they are not really linked to the acts of predecessors.

Communism? Well I guess I am bit of a lefty but just because I detest elitism doesn't make me a communist, after all I have to agree communism doesn't work.

If you think about it though any person can bitch about how their parents where not richer or whatever when they where born, to think of yourself as worse off because you where not born into a royal family is as pointless as wishing you where born in a hotter country, to celebrities or 500 years ago.
I just don't get the argument of get ride of them because no one else can get that far in life, to me that's just a typical human downfull of bitterness, resentment and self sorrow of just because you cant accomplish it no one else should (of course I don't mean you personally just generaly speaking )

Plus its been shown now that what your born into is irrelevant, one commoner will be our future queen where as another king gave it all up to go live with the woman he loved.
Its the same as a poor person can make something of their life with education, hard work and a family just as a rich person can blow it all and die lonely

I know you were being general but as I can only speak for myself I certainly don't think of myself as worse off, I would hate to be a Royal and I am quite content with my lot.

My argument is that we are a democracy so the position of head of state should not be a birthright. They should be elected by the public. Anyone that wants to be the head of state should have the opportunity to put themselves forward for said postion no matter which family they happened to be born into/married into. I guess that makes me in favour of a republic.

If we didn't have a governement, just the Queen as our 'ruler' would that be OK?

No it wouldn't, which is exactly why we don't just have them as ruler anymore. We have a great balance of ceremonial over actual power for the 21st century which is why the royals have the majority of support and why republicanism won't happen any time soon.

Don't fix what ain't broke!

I have issues with our voting system, that needs addressing long before the issue of royalty which is only felt by a few.

 

[deafgal]

MarineWAG your comment there did make me think but actually reinforces my view. Why should anyone have this life bestowed upon them (or be burdened with it, whichever way you wish to look at it) simply because they inherited it.

I also think it's unfair to say the only reason people detest their social standing is through jealousy, that is not the only reason to oppose elitism. Just because that is the way it is in plenty of countries doesn't make it OK or right. Historically the Royal Family are where they are through sheet brute force, does that mean it's OK to go and take anything we want by force and carry on and celebrate that tradition?

Because that is the way the world works. Why should anyone be born in to a poor household? Or born into a family in the third world? Why should anyone be born to celebrity parents, or to billionaires who worked hard for their money? Heck, why on earth was I born in a country where it rains 350 days of the year when clearly I could have lived somewhere much warmer. Everyone is where they are by an "accident of birth" and that's just how it goes. Everybody inherits (or is burdened by) their life. What matters is what you do with that.

Sure Royal Families of old behaved badly, just as have many non royal leaders. Most countries have a sordid history of some sort. But having that past hasn't shaped their future and the modern Royal Family has evolved to put their past behind them and use their status for the good. You cannot blame one institution for the sins of their past. Successive British Presidents have built their power on taking things by sheer brute force, do we get rid of the House of Commons? It's ridiculous to suggest the Royal Family should not be there because, well, it's just not fair they were born in to it.

You could throw all the money and status in the world at me but there is absolutely no way I would swap my life for theirs.

I totally agree with Marine. The only alternative that would answer all the criticism is communism. And we've seen how well that works

Yes of course you can't help what you are born into obviously, that is why I said previously that I don't oppose them personally, just the concept. Why do we insist on retaining a monarchy when we are supposed to live in a democracy when the two contradict each other?

How is it right that one person is eligible to be 'head of state' simply because of the family they were born into when every single other child born in the UK knows that they will never be able to attain this position on merit?
The house of commons is not the same thing at all, successive parties are voted in so they are not really linked to the acts of predecessors.

Communism? Well I guess I am bit of a lefty but just because I detest elitism doesn't make me a communist, after all I have to agree communism doesn't work.

If you think about it though any person can bitch about how their parents where not richer or whatever when they where born, to think of yourself as worse off because you where not born into a royal family is as pointless as wishing you where born in a hotter country, to celebrities or 500 years ago.
I just don't get the argument of get ride of them because no one else can get that far in life, to me that's just a typical human downfull of bitterness, resentment and self sorrow of just because you cant accomplish it no one else should (of course I don't mean you personally just generaly speaking )

Plus its been shown now that what your born into is irrelevant, one commoner will be our future queen where as another king gave it all up to go live with the woman he loved.
Its the same as a poor person can make something of their life with education, hard work and a family just as a rich person can blow it all and die lonely

I know you were being general but as I can only speak for myself I certainly don't think of myself as worse off, I would hate to be a Royal and I am quite content with my lot.

My argument is that we are a democracy so the position of head of state should not be a birthright. They should be elected by the public. Anyone that wants to be the head of state should have the opportunity to put themselves forward for said postion no matter which family they happened to be born into/married into. I guess that makes me in favour of a republic.

If we didn't have a governement, just the Queen as our 'ruler' would that be OK?

I actually don't think this setup is so bad. They can be trained due to generation of experiences. Where as our president usually don't know anything about presidency and once they get the hang of it, it's time for another president.

 

[smokey]

MarineWAG your comment there did make me think but actually reinforces my view. Why should anyone have this life bestowed upon them (or be burdened with it, whichever way you wish to look at it) simply because they inherited it.

I also think it's unfair to say the only reason people detest their social standing is through jealousy, that is not the only reason to oppose elitism. Just because that is the way it is in plenty of countries doesn't make it OK or right. Historically the Royal Family are where they are through sheet brute force, does that mean it's OK to go and take anything we want by force and carry on and celebrate that tradition?

Because that is the way the world works. Why should anyone be born in to a poor household? Or born into a family in the third world? Why should anyone be born to celebrity parents, or to billionaires who worked hard for their money? Heck, why on earth was I born in a country where it rains 350 days of the year when clearly I could have lived somewhere much warmer. Everyone is where they are by an "accident of birth" and that's just how it goes. Everybody inherits (or is burdened by) their life. What matters is what you do with that.

Sure Royal Families of old behaved badly, just as have many non royal leaders. Most countries have a sordid history of some sort. But having that past hasn't shaped their future and the modern Royal Family has evolved to put their past behind them and use their status for the good. You cannot blame one institution for the sins of their past. Successive British Presidents have built their power on taking things by sheer brute force, do we get rid of the House of Commons? It's ridiculous to suggest the Royal Family should not be there because, well, it's just not fair they were born in to it.

You could throw all the money and status in the world at me but there is absolutely no way I would swap my life for theirs.

I totally agree with Marine. The only alternative that would answer all the criticism is communism. And we've seen how well that works

Yes of course you can't help what you are born into obviously, that is why I said previously that I don't oppose them personally, just the concept. Why do we insist on retaining a monarchy when we are supposed to live in a democracy when the two contradict each other?

How is it right that one person is eligible to be 'head of state' simply because of the family they were born into when every single other child born in the UK knows that they will never be able to attain this position on merit?
The house of commons is not the same thing at all, successive parties are voted in so they are not really linked to the acts of predecessors.

Communism? Well I guess I am bit of a lefty but just because I detest elitism doesn't make me a communist, after all I have to agree communism doesn't work.

If you think about it though any person can bitch about how their parents where not richer or whatever when they where born, to think of yourself as worse off because you where not born into a royal family is as pointless as wishing you where born in a hotter country, to celebrities or 500 years ago.
I just don't get the argument of get ride of them because no one else can get that far in life, to me that's just a typical human downfull of bitterness, resentment and self sorrow of just because you cant accomplish it no one else should (of course I don't mean you personally just generaly speaking )

Plus its been shown now that what your born into is irrelevant, one commoner will be our future queen where as another king gave it all up to go live with the woman he loved.
Its the same as a poor person can make something of their life with education, hard work and a family just as a rich person can blow it all and die lonely

I know you were being general but as I can only speak for myself I certainly don't think of myself as worse off, I would hate to be a Royal and I am quite content with my lot.

My argument is that we are a democracy so the position of head of state should not be a birthright. They should be elected by the public. Anyone that wants to be the head of state should have the opportunity to put themselves forward for said postion no matter which family they happened to be born into/married into. I guess that makes me in favour of a republic.

If we didn't have a governement, just the Queen as our 'ruler' would that be OK?

I actually don't think this setup is so bad. They can be trained due to generation of experiences. Where as our president usually don't know anything about presidency and once they get the hang of it, it's time for another president.

Exactly, history is full of elected presidents and prime ministers that everyone voted for because they thought they would do a good job or promised loads only to regret it and slag them off as soon as they don't get it right and then go and vote them back in again

 

[deafgal]

Except in U.S. a president can only serve two terms (8 years total) we can't vote them back even if we really like them. Not sure how prime ministers work.