Are the royal family (British) necessary ?

Question

In this day and age are the royal family neccessary or are they an outdated institution . ? How do the Scots, Welsh , N Irish feel about giving allegiance to an English queen ?.

Answer 1

No. As Ross said, every man, woman and child is of equal value. Monarchy should be consigned to the history books. An expensive and more importantly, elitist undemocratic and outdated anachronism.

As for it being unpatriotic, how can it be unpatriotic to want democaracy for the people? Lets have a republic, with an elected head of state. The sooner the better. Power to the people, not the aristocracy!

If they are a tourist attraction lets open a theme park for them to live in. May I suggest Royal Towers as a name? Monarchy is not only undemocartic but also damages the unfortunate people who find themselves part of the royal family. From the outside they appear to be entirely dysfunctional as a family.

It's not in anyone's interest for it to continue. I'm with you Muckrake!

Answer 2

I'm a Royalist! What I would like to say though is that apart from the tourist argument, the Monarch plays a major role in representing our interests around the world. She is highly respected among world leaders and even the most ardent republican amongst you must admit that in 54 years as head of state, she has never once embarrassed our nation. I am sure that (no disrespect intended) there are plenty of Americans out there who wish their current head of state could go 54 minutes without doing this.
Of course the big question is... What would you replace the Monarchy with. Republicans always go quiet when this comes up because the immediate image is President Blair and FIrst Lady Cherie. And to all those people that call them parasites, do you really think there would be a massive tax cut if they went? Certainly not. The parasites are the chavs who go sign on and then go straight for the TennantsSuper while I am slogging my guts out. That's where my taxes are going and that annoys me a dam sight more than to see 50p (cos that'sall it costs - a MArs Bar) of it going to maintain a woman who I have the greatest respect and affection for.
Plus if we replace HM wit an elected president, the post will become political and then we are just asking for a farce! Look at the elected mayor of London Fiasco. And what has Ken actually done apart from introduce a stealth atax on motoristsand poison the pigeons? It is good that we have somebody who is above the political clownery who can keep an eye on things. (Remember Blair faking a heart atttack when she summoned hi to explain why he was signing the European contitution without commons approval?)
To our friends in Aus - I can understand you wanting a republic - you are half a world away and after that debacle in 1974 (I think) I fully understand that you need some control over your own destiny, but here in UK - the Monarchy is just part of who we are as a national identity.
God save the Queen and Long Live the Monarchy.

Answer 3

Well, if you want to put it in terms that you might understand, how do the residents of California, Ohio and Michigan feel about giving allegiance to a leader from Texas?
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are part of the British Empire, and part of the United Kingdom. They have been so for a fairly long period of time. The Stone of Scone (which sits under the throne and represents Scottish soil) means that the occupant of the throne is also the acknowledged ruler of Scotland.
To you, royalty and a royal family may seem like an outdated institution, because you've never known one and it's been a very long time since you were part of the British Empire. But to those who are included in this family, it is the best of both worlds. The royal family continues to be a centerpiece, and to provide ongoing guidance and more importantly, continuity, while the democratic process elects a leader, at stated intervals. to run the political end of the arrangement.
All members of the United Kingdom recognize the HUGE returns in tourist dollars that ensue from having a royal family. And tabloids around the world, love every goofy one of them!
Does that answer your question.

Answer 4

i'm Canadian, so have a stake in this. The Crown is unquestionably political! The Queen (or King while Charles, and then William ascend) has an identical function to the U. S. President. they're additionally the area from which ability emanates, no longer only like the u . s . a ., the place ability comes up from the persons. Granted, we don't see the on an common basis exercising of Royal ability (not greater "off together with his head" as an occasion!), yet, at the same time as at the back of the curtain, that's fairly, very genuine. it fairly is the monarch that appoints the best Minister, and names the government. by ability of convention, that's frequently the chief of the party with the main seats interior the residing house of Commons, yet, it would not could be. The Monarch additionally appoints judges, officials of the protection tension, and all kinds of alternative issues. interior the united kingdom, in addition they hire all bishops. they could vet, and approve (or no longer) all expenditures in the previous they grow to be regulation. besides, via fact the Crown is so substantial, giving us long term stable government, understanding that with William's marriage, and probably babies, that our destiny leaders are taken care of for the subsequent 60 to 80 years! study that to the u . s . a ., once you will locate approximately 2 years from now, and not previous that. we've very stable government having a Crown. it works o.k., and the Royal kin is what makes all of it exist interior the 1st place.

Answer 5

I think to echo the sex pistols, theyare good for tourism, and the Queen as a person goes I think she is a good person. It is her children that have let the side down.

I see no harm in the royal family if they do any good for the country, they work hard for the country and do a lot for charity.

But if they begin to have an adverse effect on the country or are deeply unpopular, I would get rid of them...I would not hang on to them for tradition sake. Forget this 'unbroken' line royal rubbish, the argument that we have always been a monarchical country...cause we haven't - between 1649 and 1660, England became a republic, under Oliver Cromwell and contrary to popular belief the monarchy was not restored because he was unpopular, it was because after he died the major republicans fell out with each other, so to avoid another civil war - THEY invited Charles II to take the throne.

England as a republic survived for ten years and was a major player in european politics. The republic although called the 'English' republic included Scotland and Ireland. In Scotland they at first hated it, but got used to it, some working for the government. In Ireland of course it was a very dark period for the Irish 'the curse of Cromwell'. But in short, there was a historical English Republic...so there is no reason that the English cannot become a republic again.

Answer 6

Yes. I'll say for tradition first, they have been here for millenia. Tradition defines a countries culture and it's people, little good can ever come by getting rid of tradition. The queen defines Britishness in the same way the Flag does. I say that anyone who disagrees with the Queen or her right to hold power is unpatriotic, in earlier times treasonous would have been the call (of course that doesn't hold if you're not British, but then what you think on the subject doesn't really mean anything (I suppose commonwealth countries aside)).

Then their's tourism, they more that earn their keep financially. Most of their money doesn't come from the taxpayer but from their own land holdings anyway.

Thirdly, to abolish them would require a COMPLETE overhaul of the British legal system, constitution and government. And I really don't trust this, or any, government to do that well without screwing the country up. There is nothing wrong with the way the country works now, and no point whatsoever in overhauling it, no good would come of it. I think that some people cling to the idea that being a constitutional monarchy somehow infringes on our democracy, it doesn't. All the real power rests with Parliament, which is completely democratic (and not very corrupt, unlike the US government).

Then theirs President Blair...

I stick by the old adage, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Apart from a few egotistical repulicans who are outraged that who someone's parents are matters, they don't do any harm whatsoever. There is no point in abolishing nearly two millenia of tradition for their sake.

Yes, and common to common belief, they aren't German. On the contrary, they can trace their lineage right back to the first Saxon* Kings to set foot on British soil (shortly before invading it and pushing the British into wales) and the original Kings of Wessex, and indeed the founder of the Kingdom of Wessex, Cerdic. They are the direct heirs of the very first Kings of all England, and though there may have been some marriage into other countries along the way, they remain English.

I would like to remind Scots that the heir to the Scottish throne is also the heir to the English throne, from the time of the Stewards, so she is quite rightfully Queen of Scotland.

*I suppose there is the case that the Saxons were, in fact, German. And that Cerdic and those other first Anglo-Saxon kings were born and raised in Germany/Holland/Denmark, but the same can be said of all the original English. The English emigrated from those parts thousands of years ago. In that case that they came from Germany did not detract from their Englishness, as so did all Englishmen. Even now most Englishman are of German decent from the times of that invasion. The more recent case of the Hanoverian, that the heir to the throne was Germain raised did not mean he did not have English ancestry (he did), the monarchy has most European races in it somewhere, it's still English.

Answer 7

Politics; Inbreeding; Custom and Acceptance and holding on to the way it was!
The histories of the world's Royal Families make for great and interesting reading. I am currently re-reading a biography titled "Elizabeth and Phillip" which was penned in 1991. So very enlightening and interesting.
Oh yes, somebody has to wear all those FABULOUS jewels from the "BRITISH EMPIRE". When you have a 109+ carat diamond in a brooch or tiara, why not a queen, a princess, a duchess, etc. to prance for the public.
People give a lot of lip service to their hatred for royals, but if you have ever go to London, you will see that every one shows up for the such ocassions that the royals are on display. And, don't get me started on the disposed lot from all over Europe.
Something else; we don't have a royal family in the US but what does the press and tabloid media do? They find a select group among our pop culture notables and suddenly they are tooted around as 'american royalty' (notice the A in lower cap) and the rest of us lap this s--t up by buying their badly written books, records, and endorsed clothing.
So I ask you in turn why is Royality necessary or important?

Answer 8

I was thinking the same thing the other day!i suppose theres a lot of history behind it, but they DO pretty much nothing for their country except just being royal and riding horses.And the queen is getting really old, why doesnt she give someone else a try?But in my HUMBLE opinion, they might just as well make Paris Hilton queen-it'll get more tourists and she's also not particularly talented at anything!

Answer 9

One thing my friend. Tradition. The monarchy has been around for centuries in England and always will exist. It does provide stability although these does she is more of a figure head but still a very important part of English life and history.

The younger generations will not like giving allegiance to anyone let alone the Queen but SHE is the Queen of Great Britian(the UK) not just of England. She rules Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales as well. After she is gone is when the trouble will happen as no one wants Charles to be King.

Answer 10

I don't think they are! I'm fae Scotland, and i really don't see why they're still there! Now did they do something useful, such as work!!! You know like the royal family of Sweden does, they all have jobs, work for their living then maybe yes but for what they do, being patronms of one thing or another, being totally detached from their subjects ... No way. They' re just remaining stuck in by gone days when king and queen did nothing, just enjoyed their status and let the people starve etc. They're a thing of the past and hopefully this queen is the last monarch for Britain Quite frankly they finished Top of the tops because it was way too ancient ... No one was interested, most people do not watch the queen's speech on xmas day because they're sick of it so ... Time to pull the plug and tell her children "welcome to the real world"