Should we have a referendum on the monarchy when HM dies? Watch

mnot
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#21
Report 2 weeks ago
#21
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Would make sense based on the current state of the royal family. Republic all the way! The Republic of Britain /United Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland/British Republic.
Wouldn't install a monarchy today but they do two very beneficial things for us.
1) generate huge amounts of money, tourism, memorabilia, media etc. worth quite a bit to the economy
2) A second head of state basically alongside PM, I think we get more international influence because of it as well...

Definitely would be in favour of bringing back some more control of the monarchy into the executive tho
0
reply
RJ224
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#22
Report 2 weeks ago
#22
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Would make sense based on the current state of the royal family. Republic all the way! The Republic of Britain /United Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland/British Republic.
Why not? The last one was such a great idea.
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#23
Report 2 weeks ago
#23
They should probably just gracefully bow out at this point. The family's falling apart publicly, next in line is some folk-magic quack and his brother is a nonce. Just confiscate the Crown Estate and tell them to eff off already.
0
reply
CTLeafez
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#24
Report 2 weeks ago
#24
I do think having one family being born superior enough to everyone else to have their lives paid for by the taxpayer is a very weird institution in the 21st century.

With the recent ****shows around Harry* and Andrew, it shows this is just your regular family living a life of luxury while there are people living on the breadline just miles away...

*Those saying Harry deserves to have a private life etc because he's been to Afghan; there are 1000s of Army Officers who have completed tours of duty, but you don't see them getting an easy life afterwards. Once they leave the Army, minus any pensions, they're expected to be self-sufficient.

However, the Queen has been a bastion of integrity and service to her country. A abolishing referendum should not occur before she's left us.
Last edited by CTLeafez; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#25
Report 2 weeks ago
#25
No. Its about 20-30 years too soon.

I think their time is numbered in their current state, but its still far to soon. The youth maybe split when it comes to the royals, but the older you go the more royal-loving voters you see. There are still so many who remember the old days of the royal family and would never dream of voting against them. Give it 20-30 years and we may be ready for a referendum, but if it happened right now it would be an absolute landslide in favour of them.

The only way that republicans could get any victory from it is if they posed the question in a way that asks if people think the family should be downsized, which may get more support, but I still think it would likely loose.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#26
Report 2 weeks ago
#26
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
No. Its about 20-30 years too soon.

I think their time is numbered in their current state, but its still far to soon. The youth maybe split when it comes to the royals, but the older you go the more royal-loving voters you see. There are still so many who remember the old days of the royal family and would never dream of voting against them. Give it 20-30 years and we may be ready for a referendum, but if it happened right now it would be an absolute landslide in favour of them.

The only way that republicans could get any victory from it is if they posed the question in a way that asks if people think the family should be downsized, which may get more support, but I still think it would likely loose.
Certainly my generation and older are pro royal, I'm normally well in the minority. I think the royals are safe for longer than 30 years, I think they will still be around in 60 years time.
0
reply
Greywolftwo
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#27
Report 2 weeks ago
#27
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Would make sense based on the current state of the royal family. Republic all the way! The Republic of Britain /United Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland/British Republic.
We’ll never stoop down to the levels of the US, calling us a republic 🙄
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#28
Report 2 weeks ago
#28
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
No. Its about 20-30 years too soon.

I think their time is numbered in their current state, but its still far to soon. The youth maybe split when it comes to the royals, but the older you go the more royal-loving voters you see. There are still so many who remember the old days of the royal family and would never dream of voting against them. Give it 20-30 years and we may be ready for a referendum, but if it happened right now it would be an absolute landslide in favour of them.

The only way that republicans could get any victory from it is if they posed the question in a way that asks if people think the family should be downsized, which may get more support, but I still think it would likely loose.
Support for a republic is not even close to 50% among the young and with Will and Kate on the way it’s not going to be anytime soon.
0
reply
BlueIndigoViolet
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#29
Report 2 weeks ago
#29
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
No. Its about 20-30 years too soon.

I think their time is numbered in their current state, but its still far to soon. The youth maybe split when it comes to the royals, but the older you go the more royal-loving voters you see. There are still so many who remember the old days of the royal family and would never dream of voting against them. Give it 20-30 years and we may be ready for a referendum, but if it happened right now it would be an absolute landslide in favour of them.

The only way that republicans could get any victory from it is if they posed the question in a way that asks if people think the family should be downsized, which may get more support, but I still think it would likely loose.
"20-30 years", youre misreading Twitter and TSR as a measure of public opinion, the public vastly supports the Royal Family.

A valued and recognised British institution - hope it stays for many generations to come.
Last edited by BlueIndigoViolet; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#30
Report 2 weeks ago
#30
(Original post by BlueIndigoViolet)
"20-30 years", i think youre misreading Twitter and TSR as a measure of public opinion, the public vastly supports the Royal Family.

A valued and recognised British institution - hope it stays for many generations to come.
What does it bring to you? What does the idea of unobtainable power, given to them by God, bring to the country?
0
reply
BlueIndigoViolet
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#31
Report 2 weeks ago
#31
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
What does it bring to you? What does the idea of unobtainable power, given to them by God, bring to the country?
Doesn't affect me personally significantly, in fact there is a strong economic case for the monarchy, like the majority of the population, think she serves as a stable, figurehead for this nation which many respect and value.

0
reply
Kitten in boots
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#32
Report 2 weeks ago
#32
(Original post by PotatoFruit)
We can have a referendum but the royals bring money through tourism
As a republican, I fully support using the Royal Family to maximise tourist income.

The French executed their royals and their tourist industry is booming.
3
reply
Karisa96
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#33
Report 2 weeks ago
#33
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
I think given the state of recent referenda I'd sooner shove fire ants up my urethra. Not saying I disagree with removing the monarchy, I absolutely agree (inherited power is absurd), but a referendum is a really bad idea
OMG. That sounds painful, lol. X
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#34
Report 2 weeks ago
#34
(Original post by BlueIndigoViolet)
Doesn't affect me personally significantly, in fact there is a strong economic case for the monarchy, like the majority of the population, think she serves as a stable, figurehead for this nation which many respect and value.

The financial debate is a tricky one, no one really knows the numbers. And if it was profitable to have a monarchy, I still wouldn't support people who believe they have a god given right to the throne.

And a lot of the countries don't have a monarchy and they can still have a figurehead, why can't out democratically elected politicians be the figurehead of our country?
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#35
Report 2 weeks ago
#35
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
And a lot of the countries don't have a monarchy and they can still have a figurehead, why can't out democratically elected politicians be the figurehead of our country?
Because the idea of President Johnson is really ****ing awful...?
1
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#36
Report 2 weeks ago
#36
(Original post by BlueIndigoViolet)
"20-30 years", youre misreading Twitter and TSR as a measure of public opinion, the public vastly supports the Royal Family.

A valued and recognised British institution - hope it stays for many generations to come.
For me, I think the problem is that the idea of a royal family is entirely against the moral/ethical way our society is developing. Logically if you conform to modern progressive ways of thinking, you can't be in favor of the royal family, unless you ignore the inconsistencies.

I said 20-30 years, because I think that the strongest pro-royal generation will be gone by then. Those who lived through the corronation, and still remember their street parties and radio broadcasts when they were young. Obviously currnetly all generations are generally pro-royal, but I think once the older very royalist generations decrease, there will be a significantly lower positive-royal influence on younger people.. and when they are left to make their own opinions, with less outside influences (their grandparents/parents) they will see that logically it doesn't align with the way they think. Currently societal pressure means a lot don't realise this, but the societal pressure will decrease as we go through the next 20-30 years, once the queen is gone, and once the older generation decreases in number.

Personally I'm not in favor of this. I am very pro-royal. But Unless something changes, or our society suddenly becomes more conservative in nature.. I can't see a way forward for them. Especially if Charles lives for a long long time, and the more popular william doesn't get on the throne until hes old.
1
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#37
Report 2 weeks ago
#37
(Original post by Drewski)
Because the idea of President Johnson is really ****ing awful...?
But the idea of unobtainable power, a right given by God in a supposed secular society, is better then a man that was democratically elected?
This isn't about whether you like Johnson or not.
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#38
Report 2 weeks ago
#38
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
But the idea of unobtainable power, a right given by God in a supposed secular society, is better then a man that was democratically elected?
This isn't about whether you like Johnson or not.
Everybody keeps mentioning this 'unobtainable power'... What power?

The PM already is in charge, HM is a figurehead, a ceremonial position.

It ain't broke.
0
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#39
Report 2 weeks ago
#39
(Original post by Kitten in boots)
As a republican, I fully support using the Royal Family to maximise tourist income.

The French executed their royals and their tourist industry is booming.
I work with a lot of Chinese tourists, and to be fair none of them are going to france because of anything royal. Ask them their top reasons for visiting and its the Eiffel tower, the louvre, the shopping/fashion, the food, etc. Some may go visit a palace, but its no where near the biggest motivation to go. Ask them about the UK though and the queen/buckingham palace/tower of london, changing of the guard etc. are all up there, along with big ben, football, and the like.

I think the problem for tourism isn't that we don't have anything else to offer or that other nations who don't have their royalty any more are all struggling.. its that we as a nation have built our tourist brand (especially outside of Europe) largely on the back of the royal family. Whereas nations like France focused on different aspects, we have been pushing our royalty for years as a draw for people to visit. We could change our approach and push different parts of Britain, but there would definitely be a short-term hit if we got rid of the royal family.
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#40
Report 2 weeks ago
#40
(Original post by Drewski)
Everybody keeps mentioning this 'unobtainable power'... What power?

The PM already is in charge, HM is a figurehead, a ceremonial position.

It ain't broke.
Firstly, the wealth and lifestyle the Royal family have.
And read this,
https://www.bmsf.org.uk/about-the-mo...h-m-the-queen/
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (364)
67.03%
No (179)
32.97%

Watched Threads

View All