For Brits only: What do you think about having a Royal Family?

Question

Yesterday, I saw the movie "The Queen" with Helen Mirren. It really gave me a whole new respect for the Queen. After all, it's not as if she asked for the job and she has really tried to do it to the best of her abilities. However, no matter what she does or doesn't do, there's always someone who disapproves. That being said, though, I have to also say that I'm an American and that I can't imagine what it must be like to live in a country with hereditary titles. After all, we have presidential elections every four years. Do you think that the Queen and the other Royals earn their keep or do you think that Britain would be better off without them?

Answer 1

Like all English schoolchildren of the 1950's I was brought up to have an immoveable respect for the Royal Family, 'King and Country' and so on. When the old king died I remember us kids being taken to watch the funeral cortege go by. The coffin was carried on a gun carriage and it rained. A few months later we were taken to the same spot to watch Princess Elizabeth go by in the Royal coach to be crowned queen. We were all given Union Flags to wave and received a Coronation Mug. I lost mine. Later we had street parties with sandwiches and jelly and, guess what? it rained again.

In those days the institution of the Royal Family was sacrosanct with not a hint or whsiper of scandal or wrongdoing until the late 1950's when it started with Princess Margaret having an affair with a married man, Group Captain Peter Townsend. That was soon hushed up and she ended up marrying Anthony Armstrong Jones, an arranged marriage if ever there was one.

As time went by and old traditions and protocols started to vanish it became apparent that the Royal family were not the 'whiter than white' exemplary characters we had been led to believe and since those days there have been many sordid revelations and scandals that have tarnished the Royals forever.

Prince Philip (Phil the Greek) comes across as an arrogant despot who loves to throw his weight about and cares about no-one except himself manging to have insuleted most of the world's leaders at one time or another. He, singlehandedly, managed to ostracise Canada, Australia, India and Hong Kong so that all of them and much of Africa broke away from British rule.

Princess Margaret came across as a gin-swilling, chain smoking good time girl who would party until the small hours, often drunk, and escorted by a variety of 'gentlemen'.

Prince Charles came across as a bit of a wimp whose main hobby seemed to be talking to plants and bedding as many women as he could.

Princess Anne came across with an arrogance that can only be described as unique and loved nothing but horses. To her credit she was the hardest working Royal, if you can call it work, attending more functions that any other.

Rrince Andrew was the original good time charlie who spent much of his time in nightclubs, drinking and womanising and running up more expenses than any of the others. How can you justify having the Royal jet fly him from London to Scotland for a night out at a cost of £20000 to the taxpayer?

Prince Edward came across as a bit of a nancy boy preferring to spend his time with actors and producers and it was widely assumed that he was homosexual until his marriage to Sophie. Some of us still wonder.

Then there's the spouses. Sarah Ferguson married Andrew having been living with a rally driver for a number of years and proved to be the good time that had been had by all, spending like there was no tomorrow and generally being an embarrassment.

Charles married Diana, the girl who didn't seem to have a single brain cell until Charlie dumped her and her publicity machine created the 'Saint Diana' image. I'm sorry she died but I, personally, had no time for her.

Anne had a variety of husbands starting with Captain Mark Phillips who famously hid behind her when someone attacked her car as it drove down the Mall. He was dumped for the present incumbant who probably likes horses better than he did.

Finally the queen. She comes across as very aloof and money grasping. She is well known for being a skinflint paying her staff the smallest wages in London yet being the wealthiest woman in the world. She shows no emotion at all except to smile when she is cheered.

there are many other peripheral members of the family all of whom live in wealth and privelege just for being born into the family of Germans who usurped the British throne 200 years ago.
Personally I now think we'd be better off without the whole rotten mess of them but the problem is... what is the alternative? Presidents are political and, like the USA, seem to attract corrupt and manipulated candidates. No, I think we need a Royal Family but I just wish it wasn't this lot. It's a pity we can't vote one in but sadly we're stuck with this one.

Many people say that the Royals bring vast amounts of money into the country from tourism but I've yet to meet a tourist who came to England to see the queen. Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle perhaps but more seem interested in William Shakespeare than her.

Heredetary titles have disappeared now, having been abolished by the Labour Party and Blair. In many ways they were unfair, but at least they were born to the job and not placed there at the whim of political parties which is Blair's plan.

Having said all that I think that England is the best country in the world, it's just that many of our Royals and Government are idiots that spoil it.

Finally don't let the Helen Mirren film sway you. The Royals are a verty powerful establishment and nothing detrimental woul;d be allowed to be disclosed that could be used to put them in a bad light. I mean what kind of a person has a favourite hobby of killing animals for fun. That's one of the Royals' pet loves, hunting. Or at least it was until it was banned, but they still go out to shoot deer and grouse for the fun of it.

Answer 2

I am British and am rather caught between two opposing ideas about having a royal family... the old 'true red' socialist in me thinks of the concept of one group or indevidual controlling the lives of the rest of us as abhorrant, especially if they are simply born into that position and would do almost anything to retain it, remember that at heart WW1 was a family feud between cousins in the royal houses of Britain, Russia and Germany (not many royals from any side were massacred in the filth of Flanders though). My opposing opinion is that the monarch provides an important constitutional pressure valve, restricting the power of any political party or person in Britain (not that you would think it with Blair); in many countries the supreme political and millitary leader is elected (like in the US or Ireland for example), and I personally cannot see how they could recieve the support of the people considering a large number of people preferred the other candidate(s) for the position. With a monarch the people have no alternatives and therefore, as long as they are part of an otherwise democratic government, will not divide the population.

I hope that helps, i doubt i'll ever be able to decide if i am pro or anti-monarch....

Answer 3

I am Made in Australia and PROUD to be BRITISH .why? because the Royal family and its standing protect and prevent me from being ruled by a system of Presidents, all of whom seem to get there with cash and lies .. maybe the Royal family has little actual power, but the respect and dedication by the peoples of the Commonwealth ensure that we have the freedom to vote for a government and still have respect from a greater part of the remainder of the world (NOT A FEAR FACTOR).. the USA on the other hand has a serious image problem, brought on by its political system, as do many other countries without a Royal figurehead

Answer 4

I am a Briton and am proud to have the Windsor Royal Family. It is part of my culture. If you take a way the royal aspects of England how different are we from other countries--not much. I dare not want to be considered just as the americans with different speaking voices. The current monarch, Her Majesty and her mum, dad & sister went threw a great deal for England during WWII and many Britons needed the Royal Family during that time. And just a couple decades later we dare discuss their need due to a few making an fool of themselves since the 80's.

Answer 5

The royal family are at the top of a class structure where the elite has power and privilege and the poor are reduced to spectators.
It is no different in the USA where political families, ivy league attendees, secret societies, and tyrannical corporations hold the power.
Fortunately more people have access to the information to inform them of the inequality is today's society, and eventually the power will be in the hands of the common people.
It's only a matter of time, our "leaders" know this, and are rightly frightened.

Answer 6

Sorry, I'm not British, but I think the whole idea of a royal family is completely pointless. It is an old tradition that makes people rich and powerful that don't necessarily deserve it. I believe people should work hard to get to where they are, not be born into it.

Answer 7

The Queen is a wonderful person, and I think she deserves to be a queen and is good at it. However, royalty does not coincide with today's society.

Answer 8

from uk

i respect our queen and believes that she earns her keep. she also defines the uniqueness of our culture.... but still, the whole idea of someone above us all just because of her birth is somehow obscene