[soempty]

Assuming you have a monarch now which has the same popularity as Queen at the moment, but much shorter temper, younger and desire to expand his power, would he be succesful in doing so?(either by peacefull methods or more violent approach)
I have a lot of people in my school who are related to army, and they all say that their parents and themselves are absolutely loyal to monarchy rather than parliament, so in theory army would obey the command of the monarch than? They even swear their oath to the monarch and not to the government, i would personally follow the orders of person i am sweared to, because it would be disgracefull to break what you sweared.

[gladders]

(Original post by soempty)
Assuming you have a monarch now which has the same popularity as Queen at the moment, but much shorter temper, younger and desire to expand his power, would he be succesful in doing so?(either by peacefull methods or more violent approach)
I have a lot of people in my school who are related to army, and they all say that their parents and themselves are absolutely loyal to monarchy rather than parliament, so in theory army would obey the command of the monarch than? They even swear their oath to the monarch and not to the government, i would personally follow the orders of person i am sweared to, because it would be disgracefull to break what you sweared.

I really doubt a monarchy would be able to, as they'd need to spend many months, nay years, building up popular support to sustain such a move, and it just won't be forthcoming. I think it's a lot more likely to come from a professional politician.

The oath, additionally, swears allegiance to the Queen 'according to the law'. If she tried to violently overturn the constitution, she would be breaking the law, and so the Army would be relieved of its oath to the Queen.

[soempty]

Her popular support is about 89% now, isn't it? What if she says something like "parliament acts in unconstitutional manner - army go and seize it" ?

[HeyyImRyan]

The Queen has charismatic power but does not have any real power or authority. In a time where many are calling for the removal of a monarchy I doubt any monarch would ever be so stupid - personally I support keeping the monarchy, but if the scenario you have created ever occurred then my opinion would be polarised.


That said, I think it would be impossible, it breaks conventions, and any changes to the constitution would be made via Parliamentary statute - impossible without the authority and agreement of Parliament.

(Original post by soempty)
Her popular support is about 89% now, isn't it? What if she says something like "parliament acts in unconstitutional manner - army go and seize it" ?

Parliament is the constitution, only the judiciary can dispute this via ultra vires - but that's if they outstep their authority. Parliamentary Statute is the main source of the constitution in the UK and therefore any suggestion otherwise by a monarch would be absurd.

[gladders]

(Original post by soempty)
Her popular support is about 89% now, isn't it? What if she says something like "parliament acts in unconstitutional manner - army go and seize it" ?

I think they'd need proof. Moreover, Parliament cannot act unconstitutionally as it is the writer of the Constitution. All it would need to do is pass a new law and it would be acting constitutionally.

If, however, such an act undermined the basic essence of the constitution - that of democratic rule - then she would be able to argue that she is defending the democratic constitution.

Moreover, even if she tried to take control without a good reason to, her victory would be fleeting - the army would either be horrified at what it had been made to do and depose the Queen, or she'd have to start bargaining away her power to sustain her position. It wouldn't last long.