The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #181  
Old 05-12-2017, 09:42 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 11,095
The fact that you are here at a very busy royal forum, one among many sites dedicated to royalty is an indication it is.
But I'd rather reverse the question: Why in your opinion shouldn't monarchies be relevant in today's world?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 05-14-2017, 12:19 AM
LadyGabrielle's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: kapaa, United States
Posts: 1,208
I think the world would be very boring without Royals and their day to day comings and goings. Not to say that they have any say really as to what happens in their Kingdoms because most of them are just figureheads but they do represent history and culture and dollars. I think without Royals there wouldn't be so many charities that benefit from having a royal appear at a charity function. Without royals there would be no royal weddings and royal births and there would be no over the top ceremonies for all to enjoy. I think some of us look at royals and try to better ourselves by emulating the good they do and there are some that loathe them for what they have and how they live. Without royals life would be rather dull, to me anyway. It's just nice to sometimes get away and live in another world even if it's from afar, for just a little while.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 05-14-2017, 12:45 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Burke, United States
Posts: 398
At the end of the day the world won't be over if monarchies were gone. We evolve and move forward. I like royalty because its like an escapism. A fantasy!
Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 05-14-2017, 12:48 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 8,979
Royals are a figure head, a symbol of the country. In times of great trouble like terrorist attacks they often offer a rallying point of prayers and such. They seem as relevant today as two hundred years ago.

They also bring much needed attention to good causes. And they bring in tourism. Yes, countries without royals are still popular with palaces, but people do enjoy coming out for the pomp and circumstance of events like weddings and trooping. Which brings money into the area.
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 05-14-2017, 01:08 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 11,833
What I think is actually the best part of having a monarchy is that what they do, they do for all of the people without a political agenda. They are figureheads sure but they also represent their nations as a whole people which is sorely lacking sometimes in the country I live in. They keep alive the ages old traditions and history of where the people came from, what they've gone through and still have to face together as a nation.

Frankly, I think they are national treasures.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #186  
Old 05-14-2017, 02:40 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 8,255
I live in the Netherlands and in all honesty the monarchy has almost no relevance. King or no King, the machinery of State will go on, water will flow out of the taps, people will go to work like they do, day in, day out.

But being an irrelevance does not mean that it must be abolished. People feel attachment to the royal family. They belong to the most popular public figures. They are attached to the protocol and ceremonial which are now and then displayed. When palaces are opened, or when there are exhibitions or just (like at the moment) the royal airplane will end its function because a new is purchased, in no-time all cards to visit the outgoing plane are away.

So it is an irrelevance in daily life but that does not translate into: chop these heads off! Aside of nagging about costs, most people simply see the Royal House as part of the interior, as ornament of state, which is followed with interest.

I think this will more or less be similar in other monarchies.
Reply With Quote
  #187  
Old 05-14-2017, 12:41 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: many places, United States
Posts: 1,620
Duc et Pair. I believe you have expressed brilliantly. Countries without monarchy have other symbols that they respect to bring country together at times. Kings and Queens are human symbols that their citizens respect and expect to bring continuance to a country's traditions and customs. We citizens of non monarch countries are fascinated watching the different customs played out along with expensive jewelry from ages past worn along with those expensive clothes. To most of us it is a fascinating fairy tale life that only a few will ever enjoy. I personally give them all credit for withstanding all the criticism the media and citizens throw at them without them retaliating. The average person would find that quite taxing. So yes, most respect Kings and Queens although don't care too much about their personal families. I sincerely hope there will always be Kings and Queens. Lovely.
__________________
Forgiveness is the fragrance the violet shed on the heel that crushed it - Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #188  
Old 05-14-2017, 01:51 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,071
I believe there is a place for royals and I will always believe that; I do know however that the 'fairy-tale' narrative has to end and royals have GOT to be asked upfront "do you really want to be in the succession with all the rules or are you going to walk away and live a life free of the constrictions, but no automatic deference?" Any threats to walk if they don't get what they want should be met with a smack-down and being told to bug off. Haakon hurled that threat at the head of his nation and I am certain there hasn't been any point to putting up with him. I would have ordered him to walk his backside out of that palace and sign away his status in a session of Parliament.
Reply With Quote
  #189  
Old 05-14-2017, 04:36 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 864
Most monarchs are not figureheads, and politically dominant monarchies are abundant. For instance:

Quote:
In contrast, in Bahrain since protests began in mid-February [2011], at least 13 protestors have been killed during government crackdowns, and hundreds have been injured. Security forces have attacked hospitals and medical staff. Opposition leaders have been arrested, and Bahrain’s government has welcomed Saudi troops and declared martial law to quell what have been largely peaceful protests. All 18 members of the largest voting bloc in parliament have resigned to protest the government’s violent response to demands to give the elected parliament more power.

The decision to crackdown rather than take substantive steps toward a constitutional monarchy in Bahrain has been made by a king, Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa.

The Constitutional Monarchy Option in Morocco and Bahrain | Middle East Policy Council
Quote:
Mr Thaksin, a telecommunications billionaire, had been swept to power in the wake of the 1997 Asian financial crisis. He managed to get Thailand's economy back on track by introducing mildly redistributive policies that benefitted people in previously neglected provincial areas. As a result, he became the first prime minister to complete a full term in office. His popularity soared, partly at the expense of the monarchy.

Previously, King Bhumibol had been regarded as the supreme patron of rural Thailand, initiating hundreds of development projects. With Mr Thaksin's rise many came to realise that an elected leader could improve their lives and lead to real structural change. They no longer felt dependent on a supposedly benevolent monarch who ruled by birthright.

But royalists began to fight back, spearheading a movement against Mr Thaksin which they formed in late 2005. Thaksin, however, proved resilient, backed by the majority of Thais. Poll after poll showed his apparently unbeatable popularity.

Without Bhumibol's blessing, he could never have been ousted by a coup in September 2006. Its leaders were granted an audience with the king immediately afterwards which was a clear sign of royal support.

Viewpoint: Did Thai king help stifle democracy? - BBC News
Reply With Quote
  #190  
Old 05-15-2017, 04:06 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 8,255
Yesterday Manuel Valls, the former Premier Ministre of France commented on Emmanuel Macron, the new Président de la République (the two are not so on speaking terms anymore): "His entrance at the Louvre was positive. That mix of jeunesse and tradition is good. I have no problem with bonapartism: I know that this country needs symbols, something what François Hollande has forgotten".

François Hollande tried to be Monsieur Normal, but the French do not like their president riding on a scooter to his maîtresse. So far Emmanuel Macron has indeed used a mitterrandesque slowness in protocol: dignité. The pace he walked over that loooong red carpet at the cour of the Palais de l'Élysée, on the slow beat of the drums. The solmenity of the passation de pouvoirs. For so far the new president has understood the power of symbolism (at election night he walked to the Louvre under the arousing tones of Van Beethoven's Ode an die Freude, the anthem of the European Union. That was clearly prepared on beforehand).

See picture

So the question in this thread: royal relevance, lies in the power of symbolism, the theatre of state, the grandeur of a nation and it's history. France -however a republic- (and Portugal, and Italy) know this symbolism.

At the same time: that Macron does this, and not a King, is illustrative for the fact that it is not so hard to miss a monarchy when it is about splendor. Of course Macron, Hollande, Sarkozy, Chirac, etc. were divisive and partisan figures. A King is, usually, unpartial and "durable" (longer than a presidential term).
Reply With Quote
  #191  
Old 05-15-2017, 04:26 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 11,095
You are absolutely right. I believe most people like a little splendor from time to time. A national pride thing I guess.
And those who don't absolutely love to complain about it. Alternatively point out to everybody and everything that they do not care one bit while, by chance of course, having followed it themselves.
So everybody are happy, except for the small minority who truly don't care. But who cares?
Reply With Quote
  #192  
Old 05-15-2017, 05:34 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,580
For myself, I see the value of Monarchy essentially as providing -

1) An impartial apolitical centre figure around whom all citizens [regardless of political affiliations] can unite, especially during times of National crisis or celebration.

2) A Head of state beyond the reach of faction/machination/ambition or skulduggery.

3) A mirror of the 'family' unit [to which we ALL belong], in wider society, and whose 'milestones' we can mark in our National life..
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Old 05-15-2017, 12:52 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 7,754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Yesterday Manuel Valls, the former Premier Ministre of France commented on Emmanuel Macron, the new Président de la République (the two are not so on speaking terms anymore): "His entrance at the Louvre was positive. That mix of jeunesse and tradition is good. I have no problem with bonapartism: I know that this country needs symbols, something what François Hollande has forgotten".
... [snipped]
It is absolutely wrong to apply the term "bonapartism" to President Macron. General Bonapart proved to be a successful military commander before becoming a leader of France. One can not say the same about the current president of the French republic.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things"
Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #194  
Old 06-24-2018, 09:05 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 4,007
In this day and age, if countries have a monarchy, the people should support the monarchy. I am not referring to financial support. A monarch knows that he is doing a favorable job when he has the support of the people.
Reply With Quote
  #195  
Old 06-24-2018, 09:21 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,665
In this day and age people have the right to choose to support or not support their government and that includes those of us who live in a monarchy choosing whether or not to support the monarchy. I don't support Australia being a monarchy. I think it is wrong.

I notice you are from the USA - do you argue that everyone should support the elected President in such a country? or do you believe that voicing opposition should be allowed?

Personally I believe in a country with freedom of speech, such as Australia, we should be, and are, free to voice our opposition to the monarchy, or other aspects of our government.
Reply With Quote
  #196  
Old 06-25-2018, 01:11 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: 。, Hong Kong
Posts: 489
It's a double-sided relationship, the monarchy works well so people favour them (or, don't mind their existence), people support the monarchy so it remains stable. OTOH, the monarchy works poorly so people dislike them, people oppose the monarchy so it becomes unstable (and maybe even be abolished).

I think one of the concept of modern monarchy is that the monarchs have to obtain support from their people. People even do not support the government they elected when they perform poorly, so why do they have to support their monarch which they can't choose unconditionally?
__________________
Self reminder:
Learning to ignore certain people is one of the great paths to inner peace.
Reply With Quote
  #197  
Old 06-25-2018, 05:10 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 11,095

The main difference between an elected head of state and a monarchy is that the monarchy is an institution and a family, that is merely headed by one person.
So if the monarch is poor, there may always be the heir to look to, or a sibling of the monarch to look to.
Without going into details, there is an Asian monarchy that is having these problems right now.
So a monarchy carry a lot more momentum than an elected head of state, who can be voted out of office a few years later - in some places only to be replaced by someone equally poor, or who is loathed by the other half of the population.
And that I think is one of main reasons why many monarchies have survived.
Reply With Quote
  #198  
Old 06-25-2018, 05:26 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post

The main difference between an elected head of state and a monarchy is that the monarchy is an institution and a family, that is merely headed by one person.
So if the monarch is poor, there may always be the heir to look to, or a sibling of the monarch to look to.
Without going into details, there is an Asian monarchy that is having these problems right now.
So a monarchy carry a lot more momentum than an elected head of state, who can be voted out of office a few years later - in some places only to be replaced by someone equally poor, or who is loathed by the other half of the population.
And that I think is one of main reasons why many monarchies have survived.
That's true, or even if the Monarch isn't perhaps very charming, or popular in the sense of easily getting on with people.. his wife may have charm and be abel to win people over...
Reply With Quote
  #199  
Old 06-25-2018, 06:31 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 4,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by wymanda View Post
Australian,
I think it depends on each individual country and its people. Mind you, the Monarch's and their families provide a continuity that isn't there with elected presidents/prime ministers ect. Take for example when the American President came to Australia some years ago. He was told that he and his wife would be the guests of Mr Hawke & his lovely wife, Hazel. Instead he arrives to find his host to be Mr Keating & his non Australian wife, Anita.
When visiting Britain a foreign head of state/President knows that his hostess will be HM Queen Elizabeth & her husband the Duke of Edinburgh and he/she won't get any nasty surprises.
The host of any state visit to Australia is not the prime minister, but rather the Givernor-General as the Queen’s representative.
__________________

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
Royal Yachts hrhcp Royal Life and Lifestyle 23 12-29-2014 07:13 PM
What Is The Point Of The Gr Family? sky The Royal Family of Greece 82 10-21-2004 01:26 PM
Pavlos And Marie Chantal: Current Events December 2002 - October 2003 Julia Crown Prince Pavlos, Marie Chantal and Family 76 10-14-2003 08:40 PM




Popular Tags
aif british royal family camilla caracciolo chris o'neill crown princess victoria current events daughter duchess of brabant extramarital affairs family fashion general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín juan carlos king felipe king felipe and queen letizia current events king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein lord snowdon meghan markle news nobel 2017 norwegian royal family porphyria prince carl philip prince charles prince daniel prince emmanuel prince gabriel prince harry prince harry of wales prince nicholas prince oscar prince sebastian princess alexandra of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess of asturias princess victoria queen letizia queen mary of teck queen mathilde queen maxima queen silvia royal royal ancestry royal geneology royal ladies royal wedding soldier state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria waldeck wedding windsor castle working visit



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:58 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises