English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The monarchy is an outmoded British institution which should be abolished as soon as possible.To what extent do you agree?

2007-10-30 10:05:56 · 9 answers · asked by lwloveydl 1 in Arts & Humanities History

9 answers

President Blair? No thank you!!!!!

Whatever you replaced it with would be far worse!!!!

2007-10-30 10:09:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The Monarchy is an important, distinctive characteristic of British culture. Abolish it and you abolish an valuable link to your history, heritage, traditions, and core value systems.

Over the past two centuries the Monarchy has evolved and remained a vibrant part of the British society. It is a constant global reminder to the EU, the Commonwealth, and the world at large that England cannot be ignored nor ever forgotten. There is always a place in society for traditions and rituals that tie us to our ancestors.

Lose your Monarchy and England becomes just another faded 16th century super power (like Spain or Portugal or the Netherlands) trying to have its voice heard by a world that doesn't really care what they have to say.

When the Monarchy speaks, the world still listens. It is an honorable institution despite its oddities and verities. The Monarchy also provides a public check & balance to the Prime Minister and Parliament.

Reduce and eliminate some of the tax breaks the Royals receive, yes, but NEVER undo the Monarchy.

2007-10-30 20:52:35 · answer #2 · answered by angelthe5th 4 · 1 0

I have mixed feelings on the subject. On the one hand I believe that the British monarchy is a good thing for the British for a couple of reasons. For starters, they do not actually govern the country. They are a figure head institution that aside from having an opinion on various matters, but no longer wield what I would refer to as monarchical powers in the traditional sense. I also believe that the British 'subjects' like having a royal family and that it relates to a sense of national pride. On the other hand I also agree that the monarchy has outlived its purpose in the UK. I base this opinion solely on economic reasons. I do not believe that it is inherently right that the British taxpayers should be obligated to pay for the royal family's lifestyle through their tax dollars. I am sure that the government could find better uses for that money if they just looked around.

2007-10-30 17:24:07 · answer #3 · answered by graemelemle 2 · 0 1

I do not agree.
As already suggested, with what would we replace the Queen? I'm not overly impressed with Presidents chosen by various peoples around the World, nor by ones who vote themselves into the position of Dictator.
If it ain't broke - don't try to fix it.
We've tried this once before with Oliver Cromwell and the common people were only too eager to kick him out and go back to a Monarchy.
The Queen is a very hard-working lady who was trained to do a job and she vowed at the Coronation in 1952 to do that job for the rest of her life.
I have a great deal of respect for her - I certainly wouldn't want to be working still when I am in my 80's, especially for people who can do nothing better than criticise at every turn.

2007-10-30 17:22:23 · answer #4 · answered by Veronica Alicia 7 · 2 1

I do not agree -- but take my opinion for its limited worth, as I am on the west side of the pond. The sovereign can deal with duties of state, which in a country like the US fall to the President, who already has more than enough to do to run the administration. The sovereign is also a voice of continutity, and can counsel the ministers, who hopefully will consider her advice as coming from someone taking the long view ot things.

2007-10-30 17:12:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

I think it is due for reform, but as an American, I can appreciate the system in which the British separate the symbolic and the functional leadership of the country. If our Presidents would have to worry less about posing for photos and attending ceremonial events and would do more to run the country (well, maybe not the current President. I would rather he do less, given what he has chosen to do when he has acted), I think the Presidency would work better.

2007-10-30 17:10:52 · answer #6 · answered by neniaf 7 · 0 2

The monarchy should be contractorised and sold to the highest bidder. Why should the tax payer pay £7.94 million to these parasites. Maybe some rich American would want to buy the Queen and site her in Long Beach, California as a tourist attraction.

2007-10-30 17:12:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

I am amazed that it has survived this long into the modern era.

The thought of someone becoming a nation's head of state by right of birth just boggles my mind.

2007-10-30 17:09:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Not at all, where would you put old horse face Charles and Camilla?

2007-10-30 17:10:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers