I didn't read your first question, but I can tell you that the Queen represents the love of nation to the English. They are very protective, and defensive, of anyone questioning the existence (and historical significance), of England's monarchy. It ,after all, survived when other great dynasties crumbled all around it (France, Russia, Chine, etc.). England's monarchies directly influenced western civilization as we now know it.
P.S. I'm not from England or one of it's (current???) territories
2006-12-04 05:56:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by jarinnj 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
The Queen is the Queen of Canada. This has not some thing by any skill including her being Queen of everywhere else. Canada is punctiliously, and fully autonomous of the united kingdom. We only both ensue to have a similar human being as Queen, yet, the Crowns are completely separate. even as the Queen is composed of Canada, she describes it as "coming residing house." She loves it right here, and she is somewhat a lot a Canadian citizen. Legally, and virtually too. The properly Minister, on his personal, has no power in any respect. He can somewhat do little or no. this is the Crown that has the authority in Canada; this is how our gadget works. HM reigns "with the advice of Parliament," meaning the PM works with the Crown. He represents the peoples desires, that are then performed with techniques from the Crown. it truly is so as that neither section can do some thing without the different, meaning there are checks and balances on the abuse of authority. some human beings have stated that we ought to continuously have a King or Queen who's born in Canada. yet, no-one has each and every arise with a reasonable way of choosing one. The gadget we've works, and works properly, and persons truly do not opt for to regulate it a lot.
2016-11-30 03:18:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Britain is a constitutional monarchy that has adapted over time we had a short period of a republic under Cromwell . I believe it works well as it represents the whole nation regardless of what party holds government under a Republican system will would have a president supported by a percentage of the population which will have a vote say every five years which only so many will bother to vote . The cost is also not as much as the Republican left try to make out its about 67p per taxpayer per week the royals bring more money in than take out . And its just part of our British heritage Republicanism is just not British to me.
2006-12-05 03:23:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by jack lewis 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
To be correct the UK doesn`t have a Royal family. Queen Elizabeth the second is the queen of England , Ireland and Wales.
The Scottish royal family ended with Bonnie Prince Charlie. After the government fetched George the 1st from Germany.
As she is known as Queen Elizabeth 2 she can`t belong to Scotland as we never had a Queen Elizabeth 1st.
In 1953 the scots blew up all the letter Boxes with Queen Elizabeth the Second on them.
2006-12-04 09:02:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jacqueline M 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
I've just read your previous question and answers, and I don't think you really upset anyone, apart from Glenn, who's probably had an unproductive day standing outside a school playground.
But when you ask a question about the Queen, you should be aware that you will get replies from people who think she's wonderful, and others who think she's a waste of time and money (but don't realise that basically she covers her own costs). Either way, it is something people feel very strongly about.
Personally, I'm not too bothered, but I'll miss the old girl when she's gone. And hopefully Charles will skip his turn and let William take the rei(g)ns.
Finally, I think we Brits have only to look at the envious looks that all the other nations give us to realise how lucky we are. For instance, the French would eat snails and give up washing to have their monarchy reinstated.
2006-12-04 06:06:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
God save the queen.. The world will always be unfair, but it's good to have a power base such as monarchy to counteract dodgy politicians. The army might just back the crown in such a case. The monarchy also has wide influence, beyond the politicians in many quarters of the world. Thumbs up for Charlie too.
Furthermore Charles actually cares about the country and the countryside. If it came to the crunch, i'd back his side in civil war.
2006-12-04 05:57:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by I'm Sparticus 4
·
5⤊
1⤋
Well, I'd guess that you did offend some people. I imagine you were asked if you were jealous since a lot of countries don't have royalty. I'm not necessarily jealous, but I do really like the Queen. She is also admirable since her life has been all about her duty to her people.
2006-12-04 05:52:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by Purdey EP 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
Of the 30-odd respondents to your previous question, most people answered fairly rationally, whether pro or con. Only two - Jeff K and Glenn - were irate and insulting. Given how touchy and defensive Brit royalists can get, I'd say that was a pretty good ratio.
2006-12-04 05:57:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
I am certainly not offended by the question. We have a queen: a. Because she is a descendant of the most politically astute and/or the most ruthless line
b. Because we are too lethargic and/or sycophantic to get rid of the anachronism.
2006-12-04 22:44:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by phil d 1
·
1⤊
1⤋
The UK is a KINGdom. Therefore we have a head of state a King or Queen. An empire has an emperor or empress. A PRINCipality like Monaco has a Prince and a CUNTry has George Bush for a leader.
.....sorry yanks. Old joke.
xxB
2006-12-04 05:51:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
14⤊
1⤋