Poll: Why does England still have a royal family?

Are you pro or anti royal?

  • Total voters
    604
elmarko1234 said:
The queen does not bring in tourists, it's not like she PERSONALLY has tea with every single tourist who enters the UK.

I find it quite grovelling & pathetic when I hear of people who like being "subjects" - it's seems to arise from some desire to be owned/dominated by another human - who people seem to think should be entitled to wealth & power by birthright - quite possibly the biggest affront to any form of democracy or equality.

It's quite sickening if you consider what's involved - the cretinous attitude of the people of the UK makes me ashamed to be English, it seems as a nation we have lost our "fire" are rebellious nature to fight against people who assign themselves titles over us.

But hey, if you want to see a old German women & his Greek husband as your superior go ahead - but it should be on a purely voluntary basis.

She should hold no power & receive no funding, all of the land should be taken back into public ownership & she should be forced to join the dole que with the rest of the scroungers.

If the monarchists of the UK wish to continue supporting her & her ilk they will be fully able to donate a percentage of there income to continue it, they will also be able to lower themselves to the level of subjects if they so desire.

Just stop making the rest of join your pathetic personality cult.
Click to expand...

Lol.

What subjects.
What money they pay far more than they take. They also do an enormous amount of work as diplomats. They are also fairly unique in that they stay the same between governments which is extremely useful.

As for land, why would you take it back. You going to take back ex PMs properties and wages?
 
simulatorman said:
I. We’re not as revolting as the French.
2. We are proud of our heritage.
3. They bring in the tourist loot.

God Save the Queen!
Click to expand...

This. And to anyone that doesnt like it. Go live somewhere else.

Problem with this country is its full of people that think everyone should be equal, fact is without the royal family we would be far less interesting.
 
Glaucus said:
Lol.

What subjects.
What money they pay far more than they take. They also do an enormous amount of work as diplomats. They are also fairly unique in that they stay the same between governments which is extremely useful.

As for land, why would you take it back. You going to take back ex PMs properties and wages?
Click to expand...
Because it was never hers to begin with.

You mean like the racist price Philip, or the hanging out with paedophiles trade envoy?

The fact she holds no political power is a liability - it means our prime ministers have too much power (as we have no president).

If you can't understand how the concept of "succession by birthright" is contradictory to modern established rules of equality & fairness then perhaps you need to re-examine the subject a little closer.

As I said, she could still continue - just off donations from monarchists.
 
Never hers, yes it is.
They are well respected and do several hundred meetings a year.

It's a far better system than a president, how has government got to much power compared to a presidential system.
As for birth right well that's just made up rubbish. Society is based on birth rights and always will be. I have no issues with it. People are born to rich people or people with contractors, owners of large corporations. The only important thing is social mobility.
 
Last edited:
The reason we still have a Royal family can pretty much be summed up by the fact people are such wimps. The tourism argument, the fact we have people like Prince Andrew going around the world as an envoy for British business, yes, these are all well and good, but I would strongly argue that these are not the reasons our monarchy remains.

There is one problem, and that is what our state would look like as a republic. Who would be our head of state? How would our system of government change? I spend a great deal of time thinking about these questions (political scientist alert :o), and the most frustrating thing is that the only real arguments that come in favour of maintaining the monarchy come from a failure to theorise a country after one.

Personally, I hate the fact we remain a monarchy, I hate the fact our head of state is also Supreme Governor of the Church of England and that every piece of legislation passed through our partially elected parliament needs 'royal ascent'. These are play-roles, as our monarch has no real power as head of state. They only serve to remind us of a time passed, of a system of rule long gone and a system of rule I would much rather prefer to see confined entirely to the past. It's our disgusting conservative streak which makes us so afraid of even a whiff of substantive change.

And as a caveat, my dislike for the monarchy will soon turn to hatred if Prince Charles ever gets to the throne.
 
elmarko1234 said:
What an utter insult to every single soldier, fireman, doctor or cleaner to have ever lived in this country.
Click to expand...

How many soldiers, firemen, doctors or cleaners are still doing their job at 86?

Never mind the fact that none of them have been the head of state for the past 60 years or so...
 
People who want to get rid of the monarchy seem to think it will save the country a lot of money. It is my understanding that the Queen is one of the more cost effective heads of state.
 
Naffa said:
The reason we still have a Royal family can pretty much be summed up by the fact people are such wimps. The tourism argument, the fact we have people like Prince Andrew going around the world as an envoy for British business, yes, these are all well and good, but I would strongly argue that these are not the reasons our monarchy remains.

There is one problem, and that is what our state would look like as a republic. Who would be our head of state? How would our system of government change? I spend a great deal of time thinking about these questions (political scientist alert :o), and the most frustrating thing is that the only real arguments that come in favour of maintaining the monarchy come from a failure to theorise a country after one.

Personally, I hate the fact we remain a monarchy, I hate the fact our head of state is also Supreme Governor of the Church of England and that every piece of legislation passed through our partially elected parliament needs 'royal ascent'. These are play-roles, as our monarch has no real power as head of state. They only serve to remind us of a time passed, of a system of rule long gone and a system of rule I would much rather prefer to see confined entirely to the past. It's our disgusting conservative streak which makes us so afraid of even a whiff of substantive change.

And as a caveat, my dislike for the monarchy will soon turn to hatred if Prince Charles ever gets to the throne.
Click to expand...


Or maybe people just like the Monarchy? I for one do, and it's not because I'm afraid to speak out about it.

I like having a monarchy because it's interesting and different. Even if the monarchy does cost more than it makes it doesn't really bother me, small drop in the ocean compared to something like HS2.
 
alx said:
I like having a monarchy because it's interesting and different. Even if the monarchy does cost more than it makes it doesn't really bother me, small drop in the ocean compared to something like HS2.
Click to expand...

Are you trolling? How can you even make that comparison?

A massive overhaul of a public service compared to a monarchy? Tenuous at best.

Lets be honest, you were looking for a reaction there..
 
Personally, I think the Queen does a rather hard and sometimes thankless job but seems to do it extremely well. I mean she can't be doing a bad job for other commonwealth countries to want her as their head of state too.

As the video linked above states, she doesn't cost the country anything, indeed she is a huge revenue generator through tourism and the Crown Estate. I think that people visit Britain not just to visit Royal residences, but just for the fact that we have the most famous monarchy in the world. I quite like our country being different, so what if we're technically 'subjects' it's not like it really makes much difference to any of the public, we still have some of the broadest freedoms in the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom