Lifestyle & Interests > Countries

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

How could the British monarchy be dismantled?

Given (?) That the monarchy is an anachronism in today's world, by what practical process could Britain successfully do away with it? However desirable that may seem, to me the physical, ethical and political difficulties look insurmountable.

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

CheekyBadger · M

I'm not convinved that it is an anachronism. Whilst I am fully behind democracy, the concept of an embodiment of the state is quite a useful method of getting stuff done. An elected position is another way of doing it but the problem with that is that they would have more power since they have a mandate so then would you have a Prime Minister? If you have both they would interfere with each other so I don't think that works. I suppose you could have a representative from Parliament have that role like the Speaker of the Commons. The monarch has benefit of bringing continuity to things so the PM of the day does talk to the monarch on regular basis and in a way has to explain themselves. The monarch can offer advice having been around longer and familiar with the issues. You wouldn't see that with an elected official.

wonkywinky · 51-55, M

in uk the monarchy is hugely popular,it would be a civil war level event if anyone tried to do away with it again,as in the 1600s.
i reckon the monarchists would win because it would be an army of tough white van men from billericay etc up against a load of puny right on snowflakes.

Really · 80-89, M

Some of the posts here are failing to distinguish between the present members of the royal family and the monarchy as an institution regardless of current personalities & loyalties. They are also talking about the desirability of retaining the monarchy, whereas my question was about how its dismantling could be accomplished, IF it was already thought to be an anachronism, etc.

These other issues around the royal family, or the English population's regard for them and the monarchy itself, are interesting and worth discussion but they have little to do with the question I'm asking, which is: in practical terms HOW could the institution be done away with? (and I mean not only in detail but without civil war, revolution, foreign invasion etc etc.)

In truth I think that for all the carping and "get rid of them" rhetoric that flies around, no one has proposed any sensible way of doing that and it will likely be a VERY long time before it's feasible without wreaking havoc throughout Britain. If someone has rationally thought through the details, consequences & possible time frame for doing it I'm interested. 🤨

wonkywinky · 51-55, M

@Really Well,to remove the INSTITUTION,i get now you mean the "Monarchy"as opposed to individuals.It would take an act of parliament i guess,if the people wanted this to happen.
Or a bloody revolution as in France,Russia-direct action by the proletariat to physically oust the Monarchy.
We Brits tend not to be so demonstrative,so i think the Monarchy is safe for the next 50 years anyway.We have had a Monarchy with breaks and changes of dynasty etc since William the Conqueror,and his descendants,for almost 1000 years.

Really · 80-89, M

@wonkywinky When you say 'We Brits', internally I tend to include myself, having been born & lived British well into adulthood (and moved to Canada when it - we - still had a very strong 'familial' connection.) I do recognis(z)e 😊 that a large proportion of the British (and Canadian) population reveres the monarchy and/or the queen. My question is really directed at others, who call for her/them/it to be gone.

I'm not sure, but I don't think a British act of parliament becomes law until it receives royal assent? So that would be a bit of a conundrum. If assent was not forthcoming, them what?

I sometimes ponder the 1975 Australian constitutional crisis where the outcome - dismissal of the government - may have depended on which of the PM or the GG got through to the palace first. What a hoot! And an illustration - what a can of worms is this whole subject.

I think I'm about done with responding on this topic unless I hear something new, appropriate & interesting. Thanks to all who've been thoughtful or humoro(u)s about it.

Really · 80-89, M

@Really

I think I'm about done with responding on this topic

(Chuckle) Well maybe not ...

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/albertas-lt-gov-says-shes-willing-to-toss-smiths-sovereignty-act-if-unconstitutional/ar-AA11mLou

... interesting - but no to everybody 😆

SunshineGirl · 36-40, F

Well it performs essential government functions that would need to be replaced and do you really think there is a popular appetite for more elected politicians right now? The behaviour of some members ofcthe royal family leaves much to be desired, but it is a corporate institution that amounts to more than the sum of its parts. It's one of the few parts of modern Britain that is genuinely popular. I am a republican by instinct, but I think dismantling the monarchy would be regressive and undemocratic.

DylanGuy · 22-25, M

I'm not really sure of the monarchy's future once Elizabeth is gone.
the rest of the family does not garner the same respect that she does.

View 2 more replies »

Really · 80-89, M

@DylanGuy Good answer, but regarding public opinion do you think Britain is anywhere close to wanting to do away with the monarchy? Even here in Canada I believe there's a public minority significantly large to make it politically difficult.

How would the politicians, bureaucracy and armed forces(!) be made to change their allegiance? A new head of state would be needed, with near total public support.

DylanGuy · 22-25, M

@Really A lot of people still look up to them and respect the position and tradition. In Britain it's very much a part of their national identity.
But most of that is held aloft by Elizabeth i think. once she passes away the people will look to the next in line to measure up, and if they can't than that would be the start of things going down hill. People know they don't really need the monarchy.
Right now Elizabeth is really the only one that the majority like to associate with and look up to, her likeness is on the currency in both Britain and Canada. She is the most recognized face of royalty and many young people either don't know who the other members of the family are and/or don't care. which is why i wonder how things will fair in the future.

so to answer your question, i don't think they are that close to doing away with it. like i said traditions die hard.
but i don't think it would surprise anyone if their reputation and influence starts declining greatly.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Rhode57 · 56-60, M

Well its already started happening . Harry is now living his own life and lets face it the queen aint gonna last much longer and Charles being king is a joke and I dont think its gonna be long before William and his wife are gonna go their own way as charles will never pass the crown to William until he dies . The other royals you hardly hear from anymore . I honestly think once charles is gone the royal family as we know it will be gone as well . Lets face it the younger royals just dont want the old fashioned things being a royal brings and I think William and Harrys kids are gonna be even less interested and want to go their own way . So I dont think we need to do anything , I think its gonna die a natural death and no longer gonna exist as we know it .

Really · 80-89, M

Some of the posts here are confusing the present members of the royal family with the monarchy as an institution regardless of current personalities & loyalties; They are also talking about the desirability of retaining the monarchy, whereas my question was about how its dismantling could actually be accomplished, IF it was already thought to be an anachronism or otherwise unwanted.

These other issues about the royal family and the monarchy are interesting and worth discussion but they have little to do with the question I'm asking, which is: in practical terms HOW could the institution be done away with? (I mean in England, without civil war, revolution, foreign invasion etc etc..)

hartfire

The monarchy still plays a role as a figurehead for ceremonial functions and a patron for charities.
The Westminster system is capable of carrying its history and at the same time evolving to keep pace with changing needs.

Yes, the Crown and its needs are costly, but only a tiny fraction of the country's taxes.
If England decided it wanted to cease paying, the Windsors could continue to live and thrive on The Firm's inherited estates. If this happened, it's possible that they Crown might see it as no longer appropriate to fulfill the ceremonial roles.

Who and how would the ceremonial roles be filled without the Royals?
A president? How would he or she be elected? Would he or she be given any real power? I doubt it.

MartinII · 70-79, M

It isn’t an anachronism and it wouldn’t be desirable to do away with it.

JoyfulSilence · 46-50, M

Amend the Magna Carta?

View 8 more replies »

JoyfulSilence · 46-50, M

@Really

We know history, because somebody wrote it down, right?
Whether or not these people are telling the truth is another matter. 🤪

That is why we need to read more and try and figure it out. Also, it helps to have other artifacts to corroborate the texts.

This is why I am a mathematician. It can all be figured out all over again today just like it was done in the past. And future mathematicians can think it all out fresh, too.

Of course, there is a subfield of math (or history?) called the history of mathematics.

Really · 80-89, M

There may be no stupid questions but there are plenty of bloody silly answers! (Just a general observation 😊)

JoyfulSilence · 46-50, M

@Really

Did you post something? I cannot see it.

Incomplet · 22-25

Honestly, it really doesn't matter whatsoever!

Aliens will soon kidnap all Royalty for an exhibition justifying destroying Earth by pummeling it with a few monstrous asteroids, steal Earth's water and sell it for a kagillion times their cost.

Dlrannie · 31-35, F

Would you really want to replace an essentially non political head of state with a partisan Presidential system ?

Really · 80-89, M

@Dlrannie I don't think president must be a partisan position?

Dlrannie · 31-35, F

@Really As Presidents are usually elected a degree of partisanship is inevitable 🙂

Really · 80-89, M

@Dlrannie Anyone electable by the public presumably has declared ethical and political principles. Those could be independent & personal; don't inevitably have to align with any political party or ideology. But some existing political systems may make that very unlikely. I can think of at least one. 😁

Thevy29 · 41-45, M

Never, Just think of all those paparazzi that would end up on the dole line, without the drama of the royals to document.

SW-User

Maybe stop giving them taxpayer money, evict them out of their palaces and stop caring about them

Really · 80-89, M

@SW-User

Maybe stop giving them taxpayer money, evict them out of their palaces and stop caring about them

Yes, sure: Somebody should get right on that. 😆

wonkywinky · 51-55, M

No.Best left as it is.Weve done ok for 1000 years.
Tried republicanism from 1649 to 1688.Didnt work.

Lilymoon · F

One can only hope lol

View 1 more replies »

Lilymoon · F

@Really I just think it's overrated and isn't really relevant anymore in this day and age.

I also don't think Canada needs the monarchy anymore... is there really a purpose for it anymore?

Really · 80-89, M

@Lilymoon I'm really asking about doing away with the monarchy in Britain, not in Canada where it is less relevant and simpler to get rid of - but NOT simple. First thing required would be amendment of the constitution. The last time it was tried, I believe the lid of that Pandora's box was slammed firmly shut.

Lilymoon · F

@Really Yeah I don't think it'll ever happen unfortunately

meJess · F

Not from Canada at least 😊. Not sure how it looks after the Queen passes though.

Tres13 · 51-55, M

Impregnate the Blueblood females & castrate the Blueblood males

ImperialAerosolKidFromEP · 51-55, M

For a start, you'd have to ask that question, not just of Britain but the entire Commonwealth realm

View 1 more replies »

ImperialAerosolKidFromEP · 51-55, M

@Really as I understand it, doing away with it in Canada would be an uphill battle. In fact, the guy I heard talking about it said Britain will become a republic before Canada

Really · 80-89, M

@ImperialAerosolKidFromEP

guy I heard talking about it said Britain will become a republic before Canada

I'd be interested in hearing his reasons for saying that. To me it doesn't seem likely because so much of Britain's - or I should say England's - national & emotional self-image (not to mention tourist economy) is built around the pomp & circumstance of the monarchy; its history and its trappings.

But I agree it would not be an easy transition in Canada, particularly because major changes to the constitution require a degree of unanimity among provinces that's very difficult to obtain.

ImperialAerosolKidFromEP · 51-55, M

@Really that was his reason for saying that: the Canadian constitution, not public opinion.

SW-User

That is some legendary gaslighting to convince a population that an alleged divine right of a select few inbreeding people living a life of luxury off of their backs is morally acceptable

Really · 80-89, M

@SW-User The 'convincing' was mostly done many centuries ago by force of arms. Today's population was born into the resulting entrenched and controlling sociopolitical system which they may or may not despise but from which there's no simple escape route - other than emigration to, say, Zimbabwe; which did get out from under the British monarchy but didn't exactly improve. (Sorry, no need for sarcastic irony. The devil made me do it 😁)

Add a comment...