Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should the Queen be the last Monarch? Watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    What are your opinions on having a monarch? They cost the tax payer millions, but also bring in a lot of tourism as well. Personally, I hate the idea of having a Queen/King doing nothing while there are still so many in poverty, I say nothing, but they tirelessly travel to and from Australia for lavish holidays, how brave... However, we as of yet, lack a plan on how we would do this without losing millions in tourism? Do we sell the castles, do we turn them into lavish hotels and restaurants, do we open them up to the public? People don't come to see the Queen, they come to see the palace, so wouldn't you earn more by opening them up and turning them into museums and hotels and restaurants?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I am very against the Monarchy, I don't think it's right morally, but I would also hate to have a president, I would hate to end up with one person head of state and with all the power.

    Having an elected, powerless head of state could work... but how would we even choose them. Ideally it could be someone who has done loads for charity or something... but it would probably just end up some posh private school kid whose daddy paid for him/her to get there. Kind of like we already have really. If there was a good alternative suggested then I would be very strongly in agreement.

    I don't really feel comfortable with the idea that they bring in tourism. Royalists say it all the time but I haven't seen any proof. I think our history and our heritage/buildings etc. bring in the tourism. People still go to France! No one comes to England just to see the queen. If someone showed me some good evidence that the fact that we have a monarchy is what persuades tourists to come here rather than just saying it then I would like to see it, maybe I just haven't seen it yet. To be fair when they make public appearances here and abroad they do bring in the crowds... but I just really think it's wrong to have one family undemocratically put as head of state funded by tax payers to live in luxury, just because they were born that way. I just think it says something really bad about the country. They don't really have any special qualities... though I do think the queen is pretty great doing all she does at her age. She does probably have the best healthcare in the world though.
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    She doesn't cost the taxpayer millions.

    She has a number of duties that she performs which can't be done by others.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The monarchy is a valuable part of our history and collective heritage, not to mention the numerous practical constitutional roles it fulfills. It is an institution we are lucky to have.

    Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The classical monarchy represents dead philosophies and divides loyalty. The corporatist monarchy should become the new ultimate authority.

    Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Better than President Jeremy Corbyn.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I would prefer that we *at the very least* adopted the swedish model of monarchy,
    which is to say, the monarch is essentially a citizen with absolutely no power. they just have a title.
    they should not legally "own" their mansions and lands either. I'm not sure if sweden has that, but *we* should.
    we shouldn't have a monarch who's face is plastered all over our money or their names referenced in our national anthem.
    we definitely shouldnt have this celebrity style royal family either. it's all far too much for the modern era.

    but if that's not going to happen, yes, we should adopt some basic elective republican model
    I don't necessarily see it as something that would harm democracy -
    it could improve it so long as the prime minister is, still, the clear leader
    I like the idea of a republican head of state who's elected to veto certain laws (or refer them to a supreme court), or initiate referenda.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cato the Elder)
    Better than President Jeremy Corbyn.
    is that the only reason you don't want a republic? because the people might elect a certain politician you don't happen to like?
    • Aston Villa FC Supporter
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    The monarch should definitely remain. The king or queen is a figurehead for the nation and helps preserve Britain's unique identity. Besides it generates millions in tourism revenue.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    The monarchy should continue for centuries to come, its abolition is not in the nations self interest nor my own.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    is that the only reason you don't want a republic? because the people might elect a certain politician you don't happen to like?
    Yep.

    I don't believe in democracy. Any alternative to the monarchy should be a Caesarist/Bonapartist system with a heroic leader guiding the country.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cato the Elder)
    Yep.

    I don't believe in democracy. Any alternative to the monarchy should be a Caesarist/Bonapartist system with a heroic leader guiding the country.
    ...why?
    you aren't exactly going to be the leader so how is it going to serve your interests? unless you count potential sycophancy as an "interest"?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    is that the only reason you don't want a republic? because the people might elect a certain politician you don't happen to like?
    It's not necessarily that it might be a politician that x person doesn't like, it's that it might be a politician at all.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    No way. Historically, they are very important and help to keep what little culture there is, alive. Also they are a benefit economically and in international relations.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    ...why?
    you aren't exactly going to be the leader so how is it going to serve your interests? unless you count potential sycophancy as an "interest"?
    A heroic leader in the mould of a Cromwell or a Napoleon would gain my undying loyalty, respect, admiration and subservience.

    I see no one of that stature, so I guess that person is going to have to be me
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    It's not necessarily that it might be a politician that x person doesn't like, it's that it might be a politician at all.
    ...do you count the irish president as a "politician"? +in what sense?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cato the Elder)
    A heroic leader in the mould of a Cromwell or a Napoleon would gain my undying loyalty, respect, admiration and subservience.

    I see no one of that stature, so I guess that person is going to have to be me
    why do you want a heroic leader as a head of state? how are they going to be heroic?
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That'sGreat)
    What are your opinions on having a monarch? They cost the tax payer millions, but also bring in a lot of tourism as well. Personally, I hate the idea of having a Queen/King doing nothing while there are still so many in poverty, I say nothing, but they tirelessly travel to and from Australia for lavish holidays, how brave... However, we as of yet, lack a plan on how we would do this without losing millions in tourism? Do we sell the castles, do we turn them into lavish hotels and restaurants, do we open them up to the public? People don't come to see the Queen, they come to see the palace, so wouldn't you earn more by opening them up and turning them into museums and hotels and restaurants?
    Are you insane millions of people come to the country to see the queen without a royal family the castles are just castles. Also she cost 50p per tax payer per year which isn't exactly expenseive now is it.

    Also as a proud nationalist long may she and her family reign
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    I would prefer that we *at the very least* adopted the swedish model of monarchy,
    which is to say, the monarch is essentially a citizen with absolutely no power. they just have a title.
    they should not legally "own" their mansions and lands either. I'm not sure if sweden has that, but *we* should.
    we shouldn't have a monarch who's face is plastered all over our money or their names referenced in our national anthem.
    we definitely should have this celebrity style royal family either. it's all far too much for the modern era.

    but if that's not going to happen, yes, we should adopt some basic elective republican model
    I don't necessarily see it as something that would harm democracy -
    it could improve it so long as the prime minister is, still, the clear leader
    I like the idea of a republican head of state who's elected to veto certain laws (or refer them to a supreme court), or initiate referenda.
    The queen doesn't legally own most of the palaces. She does however own her Norfolk estate
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I'd love to see what personal problems they encounter on a daily basis seem to involve us having a monarchy. Any kind of social issue is either down to the community you live in/people around you or down to some form of government. There is no harm to having this monarchy, they are more beneficial in terms of financial reasons and it's one of the defining things of our country (well that and inherent euroscepticism). There's no need to get rid of it; their role is essentially ceremonial.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.