.
- Thread starter Subbuteo_171
- Start date
Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret
Well-known member
The thing I don't understand about these things is why is a replacement needed?Join and fight against this sort of thing.
Republic
We want to see the monarchy abolished and the King replaced with an elected, democratic head of state. In place of the King we want someone chosen by the people, not running the government but representing the nation independently of our politicians. An elected, effective head of state. The...www.republic.org.uk
ThePrisoner
Well-known member
There's no doubt the country would collapse overnight if the royals weren't there. Gawd bless 'em!!
1finny
Well-known member
Oh no - he is the epitome of modern
He's rich, getting much richer whilst laughing behind the backs of the the poor who suffer
viv_andersons_nana
Well-known member
Keir Starmer was full of praise for our wonderful new king only a few weeks ago. There is absolutely no chance he will attempt to go back on something Cameron and Osbourne implemented - partly because he’d be butchered by the Tory press and partly because you get the sense he’s in favour of maintaining the status quo.
If it was put to the vote the very most you could hope for from Labour would be an abstention at best. This is despite the Royals’ popularity falling year-on-year and European Royal families being ‘scaled back’ somewhat.
Personally I and countless others across the UK see this ‘pay rise’ as disgusting but unfortunately our views have absolutely no representation at political level so nothing is going to change any time soon. Which is a shame.
Last edited:
viv_andersons_nana
Well-known member
Because there’s likely be a vacuum created by the abolition of the Monarchy which would no doubt be filled by the far-right. So you have to have something in place ready to go and ready to function. I am in favour of scrapping it but getting rid of ancient institutions is far from easy or straightforward.
Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret
Well-known member
Seems a little far fetched to me. How would "the far right" go about setting themselves up as a head of state in a country that has no head of state?
Don't see the point in replacing an unelected waste of money with an elected waste of money.
viv_andersons_nana
Well-known member
Would you trust a Conservative government or the UK establishment to dismantle the Monarchy and replace it with an institution built on equality and fair-mindedness? Or do you think their pursuit of power would see them do something that looks after their own vested interests and protects their positions of influence, power and wealth?
And the far-right infiltration is already well under way and has been for well over a decade or more. Not all of the negative stories about the Royals come from the left. As trust in politics has been eroded, politics has shifted to the right. This has been by design IMO. There’s a clear move to destabilise things now Queen Elizabeth has passed away.
Just my opinion, don’t expect anyone to agree TBH.
Last edited:
BoroMart
Well-known member
Yes, good catch
Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret
Well-known member
I wouldn't trust the Tory party or indeed the Labour party to do anything right.
But my point is about there being no need whatsoever to have a head of state that is elected or otherwise. I don't see why not having an elected head of state makes it more likely to have a Nazi elected to it than having an elected head of state. Surely if a position exists that makes it more likely that someone bad could inherit it or be elected to it if that position than if it does not exist.
viv_andersons_nana
Well-known member
So what do you propose to put in the place, or do instead, of the Monarchy? Because love it or loathe it - and I loathe it - it’s one of the most important institutions in the UK, with large swathes of the country loyal to it in some way or another - with a multitude of customs, historical context and connotations, and deep-rooted emotional ties upon which a lot of our constitution is built.
I agree it should be replaced and eventually scrapped. It’s just how you do it. You have to have a clear plan of what will come next because getting rid of it would cause huge upheaval and probably a lot of civil unrest. Are you prepared for that? We as individuals may well be but I don’t think the wider country is. We’ve been conditioned over hundreds of years to think nothing else is viable or even possible.
Which is why the media machine endured Charles was ushered in without a fuss before his Mam was even cold, let alone before an informed debate could take place.
Like I say I’m in favour of getting rid of it but just wary of the unrest it would almost certainly cause.
Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret
Well-known member
Nothing. I don't think I should be replaced with anything. I don't think there's any need. Any unrest you talk about would surely also arise if they replaced the monarchy with an elected head of state.
viv_andersons_nana
Well-known member
But surely the general point is that there will be unrest whatever happens? But my own personal view is that that unrest would be much worse without a clear succession plan. I would say there’d be less unrest with a managed, informed, sensible phasing out over time rather than just setting fire to it. That’s why I think it should be gradually phased out over time instead of being dramatically scrapped.
You would start by taking some of the land into public ownership, reducing the number of Royals who benefit from the public purse… gradually scaling it down as you go along.
I agree in the longer term there should be no real need for anything even remotely resembling a monarchy to exist but I don’t think it’s something you can do overnight.
Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret
Well-known member
Replacing something useless with something else useless makes as much sense as voting labour to replace the Tories. 
viv_andersons_nana
Well-known member
I understand what you’re saying but I just feel that you’d need a succession plan even if there was just to be literally nothing after King Charles. And the idea would be to ensure that what comes next is not useless, surely. But you would have to educate people first and that takes years and years, whatever comes next. Even if it’s just an empty space.Replacing something useless with something else useless makes as much sense as voting labour to replace the Tories.
Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret
Well-known member
I mean really I think it's that people have too rosy a view of democracy. The ideology that brought you trump BREXIT and Hitler. Sure enough there isn't much of an alternative. But just making something elected doesn't stop it from being a collosal waste of money. The issue for me is the "head of state" bit, not the "unelected" bit.
In fact I think I prefer having an unelected head of state to an elected one. I think the introduction of mayors has been a terrible error. All we get is a bunch of self promoting egotists who **** away money. See the bendy bus/routemaster nonsense in London. Imagine Andy Preston or Ben hochen on a much bigger scale. Imagine if a chancer like Boris joh....oh hang on. That actually happened.
I think having an elected head of state would dramatically increase the chances of some right wing nut job getting into power. Votes with low interest or that people do not take particularly seriously can easily be hijacked by a small group of people with strong views. And nutjobs tend to hold their views very strongly.
In fact I think I prefer having an unelected head of state to an elected one. I think the introduction of mayors has been a terrible error. All we get is a bunch of self promoting egotists who **** away money. See the bendy bus/routemaster nonsense in London. Imagine Andy Preston or Ben hochen on a much bigger scale. Imagine if a chancer like Boris joh....oh hang on. That actually happened.
I think having an elected head of state would dramatically increase the chances of some right wing nut job getting into power. Votes with low interest or that people do not take particularly seriously can easily be hijacked by a small group of people with strong views. And nutjobs tend to hold their views very strongly.