The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #21  
Old 07-26-2014, 03:05 PM
Blog Real's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 1,430
I'm 100% monarchy. Always monarchy.
The monarchy is the best regime, the oldest and the most identity.
Most countries were the kings who built.

I pity that Portugal has not already monarchy.

: Sad:
__________________

__________________
Acclamation Manuel II of Portugal: 6 May 1908
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-31-2014, 10:44 AM
DukeJonathan81's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 61
I am for monarchy, reasons including:

• An non-political Head of State, fact is a President cannot truly represent all the people as they are generally allied with an Political Party, how can a conservative president represent Socialists?

• Tradition and Heritage. Monarchy is one of the oldest Governments in the world, it has lasted for thousands of years, why not thousands more? It is also very important to several countries national identity, wouldn't it be boring of we all had the same government? Actually, a lot of European nations do...

• Tourism. Despite what republicans will say (especially concerning the UK) the royals are very good for tourism in their respective nations. In 2012 HM Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Realms celebrated her Diamond Jubilee- her 60th year on the throne(s). There were great celebrations, and it brought much attention and people to London, many came from all over to see the spectacle and many more millions tuned into Television to see the events. This brought much tourism to the United Kingdom. As does the yearly trooping of the colour and state opening of Parliament.
Or what about the Dutch abdication and inauguration 2013? This brought international attention to a small European country called the Netherlands, or what about the Popes resignation? All eyes were on a small Italian micro-nation called Vatican City.

• Continuation. HM Queen Elizabeth II has been on her throne(s) for 62 years, we know who will succeed her, we know her successors successor is. One family being there throughout the centuries isn't bad. Unlike republican presidency's which have the president there for about the maximum of ten years and they leave to scrounge off the tax payers money for the rest of their lives with their presidential pension, a royal never stops serving their country.

• A middle class royal family. The royals know how to reinvent themselves with every generation, with elected politicians it's just the same bad joke.

• They serve their nations well. Royals serve in the army, they prepare for there roles their entire life. Presidents and their family's don't, simple.

• Their down to earth. Especially in the last couple of years, royals have been marrying into "lower down" families. The current Queen of Spain was a news reporter, she sat their and told people the happenings every evening. The current married spouse of the Crown Princess of Sweden was a fitness instructor. The Queen of the Netherlands worked in a bank, the Crown Princess of Denmark lived half way across the world in a nation called Australia, the Queen of Norway once worked as an bartender. The Duchess of Cambridge in the United Kingdom worked free time in a clothes shop. These people are all from working and middle class backgrounds, royal spouses choose their wives and husbands well. Presidents sleep with who they like and don't get criticism.

• The Alternative. They are better than what their nations could have, enough said.

• It's not Undemocratic. Some of the top listed democracies in the world are monarchies, explain how it is Undemocratic. And not everybody will be able to elect their head of state, in some countries committees do it instead.

• And it's certainly not archaic. Republicanism has its routes in Ancient Rome and Greece, the Roman Republic being created in 700 BC, the Hellenic Republic being created in 100 BC. Republicanism is just as old as monarchy.

• Democracy only exists because of monarchy. It's funny how the original modern version of democracy came out of monarchist States, i.e Britain (and it's colonies), France, Russia, Prussia etc. Modern Parliaments were set up by the monarchs of these countries through "enlightened absolutism", the early republican States were hectic and had absolutely no working Government what's so ever (Revolutionary France being an example). Frances had a a bankrupt, but stable, government before the revolution. After it, France had an both bankrupt and unstable government plus a government that had just murdered millions!

• It's not costly. If anything, republican governments are generally more costly (as statistics have shown). And anyway, changing an entire governmental institution would be costly as well. And, in my opinion, you get more out of the royals in a year than your would from a politician in 20.

• Really, what would be the point in getting rid of the worlds remaining monarchies? If the people wish to keep them, then it should be by the peoples wish. As I have said before, monarchy has lasted for thousands of years, why not thousands more?




Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-31-2014, 11:00 AM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,523
I'm for monarchy in places that have a monarchy that function well. Why rock the boat? I'm for republics in places that have a republic that function well.

You'd never really know the value of the monarchy unless you abolished it for 10 years, and then did an evaluation, which is impossible. And even if one country abolished a monarchy for good, whether it worked for the better or not would be no indication of whether it would be for the benefit of any other country.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-31-2014, 11:01 AM
DukeJonathan81's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
I'm for monarchy in places that have a monarchy that function well. Why rock the boat? I'm for republics in places that have a republic that function well.



You'd never really know the value of the monarchy unless you abolished it for 10 years, and then did an evaluation, which is impossible. And even if one country abolished a monarchy for good, whether it worked for the better or not would be no indication of whether it would be for the benefit of any other country.

Yes, I agree


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-31-2014, 12:52 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Somewhere in time, Canada
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
I'm for monarchy in places that have a monarchy that function well. Why rock the boat? I'm for republics in places that have a republic that function well.

You'd never really know the value of the monarchy unless you abolished it for 10 years, and then did an evaluation, which is impossible. And even if one country abolished a monarchy for good, whether it worked for the better or not would be no indication of whether it would be for the benefit of any other country.
I agree with your comment 100% percent.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-31-2014, 12:54 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Somewhere in time, Canada
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by DukeJonathan81 View Post
I am for monarchy, reasons including:

• An non-political Head of State, fact is a President cannot truly represent all the people as they are generally allied with an Political Party, how can a conservative president represent Socialists?

• Tradition and Heritage. Monarchy is one of the oldest Governments in the world, it has lasted for thousands of years, why not thousands more? It is also very important to several countries national identity, wouldn't it be boring of we all had the same government? Actually, a lot of European nations do...

• Tourism. Despite what republicans will say (especially concerning the UK) the royals are very good for tourism in their respective nations. In 2012 HM Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Realms celebrated her Diamond Jubilee- her 60th year on the throne(s). There were great celebrations, and it brought much attention and people to London, many came from all over to see the spectacle and many more millions tuned into Television to see the events. This brought much tourism to the United Kingdom. As does the yearly trooping of the colour and state opening of Parliament.
Or what about the Dutch abdication and inauguration 2013? This brought international attention to a small European country called the Netherlands, or what about the Popes resignation? All eyes were on a small Italian micro-nation called Vatican City.

• Continuation. HM Queen Elizabeth II has been on her throne(s) for 62 years, we know who will succeed her, we know her successors successor is. One family being there throughout the centuries isn't bad. Unlike republican presidency's which have the president there for about the maximum of ten years and they leave to scrounge off the tax payers money for the rest of their lives with their presidential pension, a royal never stops serving their country.

• A middle class royal family. The royals know how to reinvent themselves with every generation, with elected politicians it's just the same bad joke.

• They serve their nations well. Royals serve in the army, they prepare for there roles their entire life. Presidents and their family's don't, simple.

• Their down to earth. Especially in the last couple of years, royals have been marrying into "lower down" families. The current Queen of Spain was a news reporter, she sat their and told people the happenings every evening. The current married spouse of the Crown Princess of Sweden was a fitness instructor. The Queen of the Netherlands worked in a bank, the Crown Princess of Denmark lived half way across the world in a nation called Australia, the Queen of Norway once worked as an bartender. The Duchess of Cambridge in the United Kingdom worked free time in a clothes shop. These people are all from working and middle class backgrounds, royal spouses choose their wives and husbands well. Presidents sleep with who they like and don't get criticism.

• The Alternative. They are better than what their nations could have, enough said.

• It's not Undemocratic. Some of the top listed democracies in the world are monarchies, explain how it is Undemocratic. And not everybody will be able to elect their head of state, in some countries committees do it instead.

• And it's certainly not archaic. Republicanism has its routes in Ancient Rome and Greece, the Roman Republic being created in 700 BC, the Hellenic Republic being created in 100 BC. Republicanism is just as old as monarchy.

• Democracy only exists because of monarchy. It's funny how the original modern version of democracy came out of monarchist States, i.e Britain (and it's colonies), France, Russia, Prussia etc. Modern Parliaments were set up by the monarchs of these countries through "enlightened absolutism", the early republican States were hectic and had absolutely no working Government what's so ever (Revolutionary France being an example). Frances had a a bankrupt, but stable, government before the revolution. After it, France had an both bankrupt and unstable government plus a government that had just murdered millions!

• It's not costly. If anything, republican governments are generally more costly (as statistics have shown). And anyway, changing an entire governmental institution would be costly as well. And, in my opinion, you get more out of the royals in a year than your would from a politician in 20.

• Really, what would be the point in getting rid of the worlds remaining monarchies? If the people wish to keep them, then it should be by the peoples wish. As I have said before, monarchy has lasted for thousands of years, why not thousands more?




Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community
I think this is a brilliant comment.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-08-2015, 09:45 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,024
From CNBC

Quote:
Countries that have a king or queen as a head of state are on average more creditworthy and have stronger balance sheets than republics, new data shows.

Sovereigns with a monarchy have an average credit rating of 'A-' according to a new report from one of the largest ratings agencies, Standard & Poors, which rates 129 countries, 39 of which have a ruling monarch.
Read more: Is having a monarchy better for your economy?
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Monarchy in Greece Fireweaver The Royal Family of Greece 306 07-19-2016 06:52 PM
Future of the Spanish Monarchy TODOI Royal Family of Spain 1088 06-28-2016 09:58 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best hat best outfit blatnik brunei catherine middleton style china coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events current events thread danish royal family duarte duchess of cambridge fashion poll felipe vi game grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe and queen letizia king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander member introduction national day normandy norwegian royals opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard princess madeleine princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess sofia maternity wear princess sofia pregnancy style queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen mathilde queen mathildes style queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima gowns queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania in belgium queen rania in new york 2016 royal royal fashion state visit sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge eveningwear the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats wreathoflaurels


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:28 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises