TSR Republican Society

Exactly so just leave it as it is.

Yeah... why wouldn't one man having all the powers of the state without even being directly elected be a problem...?

Cameron isn't a absolute tyrant - don't be melodramatic. He possesses great powers, but he wields them at the suffrance of Parliament.

He's in his position because he controls Parliament (admittedly it's somewhat different being in coalition). I don't want one person having all the powers of the state in his control.

Besides, the issue isn't about CamCam individually. It's about the fact that one position, one man essentially controls the entire political system;

one man who isn't even directly elected!

We need to separate the HoG & HoS's powers, and the only way in which to do that would be to abolish the monarchy (or at the very least sever all Constitutional ties.

I'd still want all state-funding to the Windsors to cease, as it's just a relic from the disgusting class system, but that's another matter).

No he doesn't. In this particular instance, he has to share power with Clegg. Otherwise, the Prime Minister has to work hard to ensure he maintain Parliament's confidence to continue in office, and that's not as easy as you think.

So bleeding what.

No we don't. What we absolutely must not do is create an executive office which is separate from parliament and irremovable by it. I'd rather chew my own arm off than adopt the US system.

Uh, no it's not - you're just a prejudiced class warrior.

You may have seen the bit where I said "admittedly it's somewhat different being in coalition"!

There's that little thing called the whipping system. He could get through whatever he wanted, pretty much.

I'm not talking about the US system. I'm talking about a ceremonial President with emergency powers which are taken away from the PM.

And more than proud to be. I don't think it's right that a person's entire life should be defined by the postcode in which they're born.

At the end of the day it comes down to the fact that some people are just hypocrites because they would want free education wouldnt they. Its good for a democracy not to elect everyone because you need someone their who isnt politically minded. Politicians are good at politics but their not experts on specific subjects which is where the lords come in because most of them are masters on specific subjects. They can then scrutinise some of the stuff the commoners have come up with and tel them to change it. Then the queen is in charge of the lords so its like one big cycle.

I have no idea what your point about free education is. Could you clarify it?

As to the rest, it's understandable to take the view that some officials should not be elected (although not one to which I subscribe myself), but selected by birth? That's not a check on democratically elected officials, that's a dangerous anachronism. And as for the Lords, yes, there are some experts in there, but there are also plenty of the PM's cronies. That's what most life peers are.

I have no idea what your point about free education is. Could you clarify it?

As to the rest, it's understandable to take the view that some officials should not be elected (although not one to which I subscribe myself), but selected by birth? That's not a check on democratically elected officials, that's a dangerous anachronism. And as for the Lords, yes, there are some experts in there, but there are also plenty of the PM's cronies. That's what most life peers are.

Yes sorry i will explain. They don't want to pay 50p for the monarchy but they want the whole country to pay for free education.

Re; the monarchy; I described it like this once before. You know how people say 'democracy is the worst system in the world apart from all the rest'?, well, inheritance is also the worst system for appointing a Head of State - except for all the rest.

Election isn't some magical process which makes the Head of State better or the country somehow happier or more democratic. At the end of the day, it's one method of appointment, like inheritance, and what's more, both as old and as anachronistic as each other.

We should look at each system in isolation and determine which method best serves the functions of the institution in question - not try to shoehorn in election and stroke our egos.

And re: the Lords - most life peers are absolutely not mere cronies. There are a few like that, no doubt, but most are there for very good reasons.

The only issue with the Republican Society as, well, a society is that there isn't a whole lot to actually talk about. Thus the lack of any activity in here in the last week.

Obviously the recent developments in the news have been far more discussion worthy and the society was always likely to peak around the Royal Wedding but, at this rate, we won't be discussing anything until the Queen's Jubilee next year!

Doesn't lend itself to discussion in quite the same way as other topics, I suppose.

In case anyone's interested: the Twitter page for Republic is worth following/watching.

Very very happy to have found this thread and subsequently joined the society

Not a royal wedding street party was awesome

I stand by the point what would u rather have a normal man like william to be king and head of state who isnt a political figure. Or a party leader who is politically biased. Obama summed it up perfectly saying the Queen has seen 10 presidents come and go and he wishes he could just sit down with a historical figure an discuss whats going on with no microhpones attached. The Royal Family represents everything great about this country. your not going to change anyones mind all this is going to do is make monarchists go "thank god we have a monarchy" and republicans will just say "ooo the monarchy". Nothing will change peoples opinion it will just reafirm what they believe.

Good thread. I'm a Republican.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/8544100/Jubilee-Bank-Holiday-Four-day-weekend-for-Queens-diamond-jubilee.html

The planning for the PR event of a generation is beginning! I, for one, can't wait to celebrate the fact that our Head of State has been around 60 years without a single election! Even Gaddafi hasn't managed that long!

What exactly a 'nationwide Sunday lunch' is, I don't think I'll know for a while...!