Royal family or a president?

No, you shouldn't be blamed for terrible deeds done by your predecessors but, in my view, neither should you be lauded and held in higher esteem for being born into a particular family which obtained its position through tyranny.

The hereditary principle can't be argued for logically. Some monarchs in the past have been dreadful- mad, bloodthirsty, selfish etc. Just because the one we've got at the moment is Ok doesn't mean its an excellent system for all time. There's no guarantee that the eldest child of a monarch will be any good. I expect if there was voting for a head of the state and the queen stood for election she would win - most people think she is doing a good job for the country. So that would be fine, so if Charles then wanted to stand for election against William or someone else who does a good job for public service why not.

Why not? Have the media as hyped up as at a general election, we had days of a referendum on abortion in another country and when America votes for their president , no thanks

I wonder if Charlie will be relieved or dissapointed if it passes him by ?

I’m orf to do some Queenly duties in my little palatial domain now ?

Monarchy for me every time.

Charles would have to be dead for it to pass him

Yes Annibach, I was thinking if Queenie goes on another 10yrs Charles will be knocking on 80 which is fine if in good health etc .

I'm still seething at your attitude maryeliza, what on earth makes you think you know more than any other poster?

No man should be born to rule another.
In fact they do not rule us - they serve us.

Monarchy

They do work out more economical than a presidential system imo and they do bring in revenue to the country. As Head of State and Head of the Commonwealth the Monarch is a-political. So many countries have joined the Commonwealth since its inception - there were eight at the beginning, I believe, and there are now 53, which means it must be advantageous.
I cannot see a presidential Head of State continuing with this in the same manner.

The RF and all the pomp and ceremony may be laughable to some republicans but to me it represents continuity and stability in an ever-changing and rather unstable world.

If we ever had a monarch who resembled Henry VIII in any way then I would probably become a republican.

Who is the Irish Head of State - does anyone know - or even care? Is that person respected and revered in countries around the world? Who knows?

Eloethan
We laugh at North Korean or Thai people for their fawning adulation of their rulers

Well, I don't laugh, but I do feel sorry for the North Koreans because if they did not 'fawn' who knows what would happen to them or their families.

You cannot equate them with our RF.

If you do, I think one or two Gransnetters should be fearful of the knock on the door .....

So that would be fine, so if Charles then wanted to stand for election against William or someone else who does a good job for public service why not.

Ask Brenda from Bristol why not!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6-IQAdFU3w

The Queen has provided a sense of stability throughout her long reign.

She has been there through out my entire life.

When Queen Elizabeth dies I believe
we all (Monarchist or Republican) will feel the shifting of the sands

Perhaps we should revert to the old Scottish/Irish/Welsh system whereby the ruler was chosen under the rules of Tanistry. This system allows for the most suitable person, in terms of age, fitness for the role and ability to command the greatest loyalty, to be picked from among the 10 closest to the Monarch as opposed to the role automatically going to the first born child - who might be still an infant, disabled in some way or otherwise incapable of being an effective ruler.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanistry

Actually Jamila theres very little serving...they take take take and expect it ,there is no better example of "entitlement" ...yet we condemn poor people who are out of work or disabled or even just old...for asking for a miniscule amount of taxpayers cash .While royalty takes upwards of 300 MILLION ayear to support !

That's not a bad idea Granny23 - would it apply if the first-born did not wish to take the role and someone else was willing?

I also fail to understand the insult Baldy Willie Paddyann. You seem to have a real problem with royalty. Some of the royals certainly do serve the people of this country. Not sure I'd like their job.

Did anyone see this week’s Royal Countryfile? I had no idea that the Queen and Prince Philip had done so much for conservation.

Although not a Royalist by instinct, I did have a passing thought that probably without the monarchy Royal Windsor Park would have been gobbled up and would have been one giant housing estate by now.

I have pointed out every time this subject comes up on Gransnet that we do not have to follow the American example. There are all sorts of ways to run a republic. Does no one on here have any political education?

The intrusive nature of today’s news media means that if we did have a useless waste of space as a monarch it couldn’t easily be covered up (Unlike the past).

The Queen is exactly what a monarch should be. Her father was a good king. Charles, though less appealing than the Queen, would also be a responsible king, as would William. I don’t think we have any immediate prospect of a bad monarch like some in the past. If we did get one, I think these days they would not be tolerated. Until that happens, I’m in favour of monarchy.

Rabid republicans I know - and there’s a few of them, some in my own family - all seem rather sour, resentful people with chips on their shoulders. I’m sure there are moderate, pleasant republicans, but I don’t seem to come across them.

Grandma70s I am a republican. I object to your characterisation of republicans as being resentful, with a chips on their shoulders. How many republicans do you know and do they all fit your very prejudiced perception?

The OP had asked that people put forward their views without being unpleasant. Most people have adhered to that request.

Grandma70s I have relatives some very close who are just like that chippy and resentful and they have no reasons to be as lives are just dfandy and being in a Republic would make no material difference to them. We all agree to disagree to avoid family rows.

Eloethan, re-read my last paragraph. I am talking about republicans I know, not all republicans, as I have clearly pointed out. I haven’t been specifically unpleasant to anyone on this forum. I am not prejudiced (pre-judging). I am giving opinions about examples I have seen, not before I have seen them.

Teetime We too avoid the subject to avoid family rows.

Monarchy, with all their failings they are far better than a washed up politician. That aside I do really like the pagentry that goes with our Monarchy, it is good for tourism and keeps a lot of people employed.