British Republicanism

[The Dark Lord]

Hey, do we have any republicans from Britain here? I know this is a bit random for a topic, but I thought that it might be interesting to hear from any British republicans. Irish republicans are welcome as well.

 

Also, please explain why you're a republican and when you began to harbor such sentiments.

 

Thanks.

[Danqazmlp]

To be honest I'm not sure what republicanism is supposed to represent and mean. Is it basically conservatism?

 

Edit: I've never really liked labelling myself as having one view. My opinions on different subjects change, I'm all over the shop. Sometimes my opinion can change from one day to the next.

[The Dark Lord]

To be honest I'm not sure what republicanism is supposed to represent and mean. Is it basically conservatism?

 

I'm not talking about the Republican Party. I'm talking about republicanism as a form of government: representatives chosen by citizens. Republicans would be anti-monarchists. An example of republican movements would be the American and Irish revolutions. I'm not saying that all republicans are revolutionaries, but the majority would certainly harbor sympathies toward both aforementioned movements.

 

Believe it or not, but there are/have been British republicans (an example of which is Thomas Paine), although they're in the minority. I just want to hear from anyone that knows any such people or actually is a republican himself. It would be interesting to hear their opinions.

[OldJoe]

Do you mean as in the question about monarchy?

My country has monarchs too, but they only cost 4m per year so there's no reason to remove them. Altho they are imported from France.

 

Or republican as in conservative? On most tests and quiz' i score as neo-con, but, i'm very pro animal&environment.

 

I'm not British, but i chose to answer anyway! Hah! Lol.

[Danqazmlp]

I think the British system works well. We have the representative government (although the voting system does need some changing) and a nice touristy Monarchy. Instead of what was originally in place with the government there to keep the Monarchy in check and stop them doing wild things, it has kind of changed into the other way around. The monarchy is well placed to stop the government going over the top and for example declaring war on random countries.

[The Dark Lord]

As a disclaimer, I'm not here to question the British governmental system. In fact, from what I have observed about it, it seems to work quite well for Britain. Personally, I believe that Constitutional Monarchy and a Republic both have their advantages (honestly, they rate about the same on a scale of "freedom"), but I'm primarily interested in the republican versus royalist debate.

 

Honestly, I don't want this to end up erupting into an American versus Britisher flame war. :roll:

[1_man_army]

I'm not in favour of having a Monarchy, nobody should be given such a status just because they passed through a certain person's womb. They might only hold a fraction of the power they once had and much of that may be ceremonial but that is too much power for a group of people who serve no real purpose. The cost of keeping them in the style they are accustomed to could go towards paying for things that people in this country need like schools & hospitals instead of allowing Prince William & Prince Andrew to use the RAF as their personal taxi service for example. To me, any form of Monarchy serves no purpose and has no place in a supposedly modern democracy.

 

I still find the tourism argument a bit baffling; nobody meets the Royals when they visit (generally), the tourist hotspots like Buckingham Palace would still attract tourists (look at how well the Versailles Palace in France does). Many tourists may come here for our history but that seems a weak argument to me - look at how well the other Europeans nations do without their old Monarchies.

[Will H]

It does hold a purpose, we were close to seeing just that in the last election. If the MPs cannot reach an agreement about how to structure their government, then there needs to be someone to make the call and dissolve parliament again. If it's another elected representative, then they'll be equally undecided or unwilling to do their job for fears of unpopularity in their parties. On the other hand, if the government goes out of control and no longer works in the interest of the country, it can equally be disbanded. It's a failsafe, and it's harmless anyway.

[1_man_army]

Those powers are almost purely ceremonial, the Monarchy doesn't tend to make the decision about dissolving parliament they are there as the rubberstamp once the decision has been made by the party leaders. Can you ever see the Royals dissolving parliament against the will of a functioning government (even if it doesn't serve the interests of the people)? Not likely.

[Will H]

Those powers are almost purely ceremonial, the Monarchy doesn't tend to make the decision about dissolving parliament they are there as the rubberstamp once the decision has been made by the party leaders. Can you ever see the Royals dissolving parliament against the will of a functioning government (even if it doesn't serve the interests of the people)? Not likely.

 

No, that's not why they're there. It's only when something goes seriously wrong, such as when there is no functioning government at all for a long time. Democracy isn't foolproof, everyone knows that, so the best way is to cover all of your bases.

[Dracion1]

I think the current system we have with regards to the Queen is fine (ok, our parliamentary system could do with reform, but that's another story). She may just be a figurehead now, but it's traditional, and a part of the national identity. There's a lot of 'British culture' that involves the queen too. Despite all the scandals that the media keeps throwing at us, I think there's a fair amount of respect for the monarchy still. It would also be kind of odd, since they also count as "Royal family" for a lot of other commonwealth realms too (doesn't the Queen own about 90% of Canada or something like that?). Also, a fair few other European nations still have monarchys. Belgium, Spain, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Denmark all still have Royal Families as such.

[Lateralus]

The monarchy reinforces both the class system and an idea of innate superiority. No amount of tourist money can make that alright. Frankly I think it's a bit of a joke that we've tried to have it both ways for so long.

[transcript80]

Since our (Dutch) queen is mostly a figurehead/representative for our country, I have nothing against the monarchy.

The fact that she still has (limitid) political powers is something I want to be improved. It is wrong to impose certain (political) powers upoun someone just because he/she wa sin the right cradle.

 

Some time ago, it was calculated that our royals generate several billions wordt of business orders a year for dutch companies. While I still think the royals should not be exempted from taxes and their yearly allowance should be a LOT lower, it is a relatively small price to pay.

 

And yes, we imported our royals as well. We even sing about it in our national anthem...Dang you germans!

 

Plus: they provide the tabloids with something to write about. Go dutch "journalism".