Abolishing the British Monarchy

[Whyayeman]

Returning to the issue as put in the original post:

Will abolishing the monarchy be a good or bad thing for Britain? As an American, I believe the monarchy is a good thing.

If Americans are keen for us Brits to retain our monarchy, why was it so important Americans to get rid of it?

(I think we know the answer!)

 

[Hans Blaster]

Returning to the issue as put in the original post:

Will abolishing the monarchy be a good or bad thing for Britain? As an American, I believe the monarchy is a good thing.

If Americans are keen for us Brits to retain our monarchy, why was it so important Americans to get rid of it?

(I think we know the answer!)

The current American interest in "royals" seems to be largely a part of celebrity culture. "Royals" have the advantage not having to have done any grubby "work" to obtain their status and not being an actual consequences of their existence. (The "royals" are disadvantaged in not needing talent, charm, success, or attractiveness to gain the public attention.)

 

[bèlla]

Americans don't care either way. We liked Diana and her bloodline is American. But the rest don't warrant much discussion. Harry is fine but William and Kate will never be loved and we didn't connect with Charles and Camilla as most believe the family was responsible for Diana's death.

For the most part, the ones that follow their exploits are usually bewildered, shaking their head or laughing. It's like watching a soap opera. We don't reverence them like the Brits. We see through the pomp. They're living off the people. Why would we defend that? We have enough of that ourselves to worry about yours.

~bella

 

[tampasteve]

Broadly my beliefs follow the exact opposite of @bèlla , but then we can all hold beliefs about monarchy with little impact on our lives as Americans. I like Prince William and Princess Kate but dislike Harry and Meghan. I find a connection to King Charles and Queen Camilla as stewards of the country, kingdom and the Commonwealth Realms. All politicians live off the people in some way, a monarch at least gives the country something back in the form of symbolism and pride.

I am an American supporter of monarchy, British or otherwise. Personally I believe that a semi-constitutional monarchy and a Westminster Parliamentary system have advantages over the two party strong presidential system of America. Our system is broken at this point.

In regards to royalty in general, people tend to desire a measure of pomp and circumstance, be it from celebrities of Hollywood, strong political personalities, or from royalty. A monarchy gives the country something and someone to unify them, someone above and set apart from the rabble of the parliament or congress. The monarch can be someone that liberals and conservatives can either rally behind or against, but the monarch unifies in either way.

 

[Desk trauma]

I am an American supporter of monarchy, British or otherwise.

The Kim Dynasty thanks you for your support.

 

[bèlla]

@tampasteve I don't know your age but you're probably older. Younger generations are less trusting and unlikely to share the opinions others held. We don't view the monarchy, politics or society with the same idealism.

William plans to be a work at home royal and Kate is probably being replaced. He has to do it before he takes the throne. I admit that Charles and Camilla have a better work ethic. As for Harry and Meghan, they're gone.

There's a global shaking taking place. That's what I'm following. I pay attention to related stories. I'm not into celebrities either and never was. I'm not easily impressed and I see beyond the mask. I have similar thoughts about politicians too.

It's all a game. Once you realize the truth you can play along. But as long as you believe in them you'll end up on the wrong side of the table. You'll see.

Money devoid of God is a mess. That's what reigns you in and makes you do the harder thing. Without Jesus you'll do like the rest. Whatever you want and whatever runs deep.

~bella

 

[tampasteve]

The Kim Dynasty thanks you for your support.

Just because it is hereditary does not make it a monarchy. There are Presidential "republics" and dictatorships that have been hereditary and monarchies that are not hereditary.

 

[Desk trauma]

Just because it is hereditary does not make it a monarchy. There are Presidential "republics" and dictatorships that have been hereditary and monarchies that are not hereditary.

It’s the closest thing we have to an absolute monarchy, why not cheer them on?

 

[tampasteve]

@tampasteve I don't know your age but you're probably older. Younger generations are less trusting and unlikely to share the opinions others held. We don't view the monarchy, politics or society with the same idealism.

Probably younger than you think There is actually a pretty broad movement among younger people to be more conservative politically and socially than the people 30-50 years old. I would not say it is the majority, but it is larger than some seem to realize.

 

[tampasteve]

It’s the closest thing we have to an absolute monarchy, why not cheer them on?

Re-read my post, I said I was a fan of semi-constitutional monarchies, not absolute. Besides, there are examples of real and current absolute monarchies if you wanted to go that route. So no, they are still not monarchs - he is a dictator of a hereditary communist state. Those are different systems of government.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Just because it is hereditary does not make it a monarchy. There are Presidential "republics" and dictatorships that have been hereditary and monarchies that are not hereditary.

If they are heredity, then they are not republics. (A republic is a state with a non-hereditary head. It is the opposite of a monarchy.)

 

[tampasteve]

If they are heredity, then they are not republics. (A republic is a state with a non-hereditary head. It is the opposite of a monarchy.)

A lot of countries that claim the system of "republic" are not, many are in reality dictatorships. But they still claim to be democratic and have elections, fraught with fraud as they may be. Several have even had transitions from father to son. They may not be real republics, they are not monarchies either.

 

[Desk trauma]

Re-read my post, I said I was a fan of semi-constitutional monarchies, not absolute.

You didn’t make the distinction between types of monarchies in the post I replied to, you said you were a fan of monarchy British and otherwise.

Besides, there are examples of real and current absolute monarchies if you wanted to go that route. So no, they are still not monarchs - he is a dictator of a hereditary communist state. Those are different systems of government.

Right, the house of saud thanks you for your support, better?

 

[tampasteve]

You didn’t make the distinction between types of monarchies in the post I replied to, you said you were a fan of monarchy British and otherwise.

Yes I did, it was the next sentance, you can look back but I will quote myself here:

I am an American supporter of monarchy, British or otherwise. Personally I believe that a semi-constitutional monarchy and a Westminster Parliamentary system have advantages over the two party strong presidential system of America. Our system is broken at this point.

Right, the house of saud thanks you for your support, better?

Again, I am not a supporter of absolute monarchies.

 

[Desk trauma]

Yes I did, it was the next sentance, you can look back but I will quote myself here:

That makes no mention of your opposing absolute monarchy only that you think we would benefit from the British system being implemented in the US.

Would we have to start bowing and scraping before the balding ginger whose already here or would we get a brand new toff shipped in?

 

[tampasteve]

That makes no mention of your opposing absolute monarchy only that you think we would benefit from the British system being implemented in the US.

Fair enough that I did not say that I was opposed to absolute monarchy, I also did not make a list of the different systems of government that I am opposed to otherwise because it is not necessary when I stated my preference.

Would we have to start bowing and scraping before the balding ginger whose already here or would we get a brand new toff shipped in?

That's debated among American monarchists. Most generally lean towards a descendant of George Washington, King Charles III, or the restoration of the Hawaiian monarchy.

 

[Hans Blaster]

That's debated among American monarchists.

The mere existence of such a grouping is antithetical to our nation.

Most generally lean towards a descendant of George Washington, King Charles III, or the restoration of the Hawaiian monarchy.

How disgusting. (G. Washington doesn't have any descendants.)

 

[Desk trauma]

Fair enough that I did not say that I was opposed to absolute monarchy,

You said you were for monarchy, no mention of only being for a certain type.

I also did not make a list of the different systems of government that I am opposed to otherwise because it is not necessary when I stated my preference.

You made no mention of other systems of government, only monarchy in general and the US being better off with a parliament and a man with a fancy hat.

 

[tampasteve]

The mere existence of such a grouping is antithetical to our nation.

I know.

How disgusting. (G. Washington doesn't have any descendants.)

Not direct, but familial. It's not my preference anyway, that being one of the reasons.

You said you were for monarchy, no mention of only being for a certain type.

I stated what I preferred, I did not realize that it would be required to state what I also did not support, we can stop beating that horse.

 

[Whyayeman]

I like Prince William and Princess Kate but dislike Harry and Meghan.

No you don't. You have not met any of them. You are just drinking at the fountain of gossip about them. Most of the British press make up their stories. Even a cursory glance shows that the stories are speculative.

The plain and obvious fact is that none of us know them. They are almost totally invisible for most of the time.