The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #261  
Old 12-09-2007, 01:16 PM
KingCharles's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 31
But if they are a pointless institution then what is the point? And may I state that why would anyone want to be the national figurehead anyway?
The president of a constitutional presidency would have to be a previous party politician to be given a vote of confidence from the public and to be honest politics in the UK is a shambles so why would this be the right choice for the future?
Another thing is that a president would have to be trained fast. A monarch is trained from birth as to what they will inherit and become.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 12-09-2007, 01:21 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Well, we have to have a Head of State. We could just let the PM be Head of State but that get rids of a safeguard most monarchists seem to be desperate to enforce. I doubt very much that the British would ever vote in a Stalin or a Franco but that's a different thread altogether.

You're incorrect to say that a President would have to be a party polician. As I stated before, Vaira wasn't a party politician nor had she ever been involved in politics. There are thousands of candidates who fit that profile for a ceremonial British President. You talk of training, how hard is it? Read a speech someone else writes for you, wear a sash and a medal occassionally, fly around the world and wave, look dignified at national events - let's face it, it's not rocket science.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 12-09-2007, 01:37 PM
KingCharles's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 31
Are you in favour of a republic then?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 12-09-2007, 01:56 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
I'm in favour of a dignified end to one system and the dignified establishment of another, that being monarchy and republic respectively. So yes, I am in favour of a republic but only if we can end things on good form.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 12-09-2007, 02:11 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingCharles View Post
But if they are a pointless institution then what is the point? And may I state that why would anyone want to be the national figurehead anyway?
The president of a constitutional presidency would have to be a previous party politician to be given a vote of confidence from the public and to be honest politics in the UK is a shambles so why would this be the right choice for the future?
Another thing is that a president would have to be trained fast. A monarch is trained from birth as to what they will inherit and become.
I agree with you. Can you imagine the likes of Blair or Brown as president, they have milked enough money out of taxpayers in the time they have been in power. What would happen in this republic when the president only gets 30% of the people turning out to vote for him or her, or the disgraceful loss or disregard of ballot papers in Scotland that allowed the SNP in!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 12-09-2007, 02:26 PM
QueenMaharet's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Saline, United States
Posts: 84
Quote:
Of course it's pointless. We've got a wealthy family pretending they make a difference when they don't. There's nothing the Queen does that a President couldn't do and indeed we've seen many Presidents do it elsewhere. Vaira Vike-Freiberga was a superb Head of State for Latvia - elected and free of politics. On the other side of the coin, Tarja Halonen has been a brilliant Head of State for Finland - elected and party political. It can work, it does work and I don't see why it shouldn't work in Britain.
You make it sound as if you wouldn't have to pay a president that was elected into the position.....no matter what, you will have a wealthy family in control, because that is how the world works. Someone off the streets without a penny to his/her name isn't going to be able to run for a government position.......

Also, from the point of view of someone who lives in what is considered a democracy....I never feel that my president represents "the people" Anyone that is fully involved in politics does not represent the people, because the average person doesn't follow politics, at least not to the extent that is needed to understand it and make an informed decision. Not to mention the amount of lying that goes on....the "I will do this if you vote for me" etc. etc. Things that never (or rarely) happen. Also, don't you already have elected positions that "run" the country?

I like the monarchy, though some of my reasons may not be related to politics directly, though I do think that the younger generation (My generation-sorta I'm 22 yrs old.... ) doesn't really do squat, and that is disappointing. I just can't bring myself to begrudge a family because they were born into something, and have things that I don't have. It makes no sense to punish them for being born....though I'm not saying that is anyone's intention...

Ha! I almost want to say "Why can't we all just get along?" Why can't a solution be made where we keep the monarchy, and make it work, instead of getting rid of it?

I am certainly not an expert on British Government (or even American government....) so I am still learning here, but what do you mean by party politicians, and that a president wouldn't have to be one....?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 12-09-2007, 02:28 PM
QueenMaharet's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Saline, United States
Posts: 84
Quote:
There are thousands of candidates who fit that profile for a ceremonial British President. You talk of training, how hard is it? Read a speech someone else writes for you, wear a sash and a medal occassionally, fly around the world and wave, look dignified at national events - let's face it, it's not rocket science.
Have you seen Mr Bush? Apparently, its pretty hard..........
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 12-09-2007, 02:38 PM
KingCharles's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMaharet View Post
You make it sound as if you wouldn't have to pay a president that was elected into the position.....no matter what, you will have a wealthy family in control, because that is how the world works. Someone off the streets without a penny to his/her name isn't going to be able to run for a government position.......

Also, from the point of view of someone who lives in what is considered a democracy....I never feel that my president represents "the people" Anyone that is fully involved in politics does not represent the people, because the average person doesn't follow politics, at least not to the extent that is needed to understand it and make an informed decision. Not to mention the amount of lying that goes on....the "I will do this if you vote for me" etc. etc. Things that never (or rarely) happen. Also, don't you already have elected positions that "run" the country?

I like the monarchy, though some of my reasons may not be related to politics directly, though I do think that the younger generation (My generation-sorta I'm 22 yrs old.... ) doesn't really do squat, and that is disappointing. I just can't bring myself to begrudge a family because they were born into something, and have things that I don't have. It makes no sense to punish them for being born....though I'm not saying that is anyone's intention...

Ha! I almost want to say "Why can't we all just get along?" Why can't a solution be made where we keep the monarchy, and make it work, instead of getting rid of it?

I am certainly not an expert on British Government (or even American government....) so I am still learning here, but what do you mean by party politicians, and that a president wouldn't have to be one....?

What I meant was in most cases a President of a figurehead form in government is someone who has had experience of politics and government which in turn can make them less believable and acceptable as a head of state who has ceremonial functions. The Queen does not have any political background which is why she is acceptable, however I feel the monarchy should be allowed to express their views political or otherwise without changing the format of parliamentary monarchy as a form of government within the United Kingdom.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #269  
Old 12-09-2007, 08:24 PM
QueenMaharet's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Saline, United States
Posts: 84
Quote:
What I meant was in most cases a President of a figurehead form in government is someone who has had experience of politics and government which in turn can make them less believable and acceptable as a head of state who has ceremonial functions. The Queen does not have any political background which is why she is acceptable, however I feel the monarchy should be allowed to express their views political or otherwise without changing the format of parliamentary monarchy as a form of government within the United Kingdom.
Gotcha. I agree that on one hand it would be nice to hear what she thinks, and what her views are, but on the other hand....I don't want to know what her political views are....because then she isn't as unbiased.....does that make sense? Probably not, but thats ok.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #270  
Old 12-09-2007, 08:35 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I think there are two things discussed here: performing ceremonial functions which is admittedly not too hard and the other is acting as the human symbol of a nation's identity; that is a tougher one because there is no formula of how one person's character becomes the symbol for a whole nation. I think whether a nation elects a King or a President, to pay someone just to cut ribbons and go to dinners is rather a waste of money. But if a person can become a rallying point for the nation that most people can identify with without getting into politics, then it seems worth it.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #271  
Old 12-09-2007, 08:46 PM
KingCharles's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 31
I personally would like to see a more substantial relevance to monarchy in the future. I think the people would have more understanding for the monarchy today if they had more power. It is only historic events which have limited the monarchy to what it has become today which is why I think that the majority feel that the Queen does nothing relevant. So perhaps giving the monarch more power over the country and the mechanics of government would give them more of a prominent role in every day life rather than the annual Christmas message and uplifting appearance. I can understand why many establishments are sworn to the crown such as the army, air force, police etc, but with that being said, if the Queen or King, had more political power the crown connection might be stronger and therefore create a stronger bond with the monarchy on a whole.
I know parliament would never allow extra powers for the monarchy however, I feel it would make the establishment more viable and prove them to have longevity for the future as I can, unfortunately, see the abolition on monarchy in the UK with all this talk on an EU Constitution.
Maybe thats another topic however.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 12-09-2007, 09:36 PM
Thomas Parkman's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Columbia, United States
Posts: 531
Well, dear Beatrix Fan, may I suggest there is something strange here. You suggest that the British people are subservient? to the Royal Family,??? ie the Queen, etc and at the same time the Queen is nothing but a useless figurehead. You cannot have your cake as it were and eat it too. It is really a question of values or taste. Being in a totally corrupt and incompetent republic run by idiots elected by idiots I admire the Queen and monarchy if for no other reason than she detracts attention from the politicans. Any institution that by its very existence can even in some small measure, and I suspect the Queen does this in more than small measure, deflate the politicans egos or remind them and everybody of something other than their smelly selves cannot be a bad thing. I have live through 47 years of smelly politicans being elected Head of State. One does get weary of it.

So I suggest that you move to the good old US of A-South Carolina would be perfect, you will just love the month of August here and the local politicians will just transport you to places I cannot mention on the Royal Forums and the stupidity of the citizenry will make you understand why you are there-and I will move to Great Britain and we can both be totally disillusioned. AGAIN. But I will still have pomp, circumstance, tiaras,-just love those tiaras, you know- and some shred of colour and dignity.

And yes, it may all be illusion, but can we not still have a few comforting albeit harmless illusions. God knows that is not much else these days. Cheers. Your friend Thomas.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 12-09-2007, 10:23 PM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,980
Thomas, as a resident of the Great State of Virginia, I applaud and agree with your post. We do indeed have an incompetent republic run by idiots elected by idiots, as you so eloquently pointed out. I say God Save the Queen and I wish to Heaven that we had her over here; when she came to the Commonwealth (that's Virginia) we all went crazy because she was here---it was an exciting time for all of us and we enjoyed her presence greatly. I cannot imagine wanting to do away with such a marvelous institution; its not like the Royal Family doesn't do anything--they are very involved and believe strongly in service to the country--unlike this country where politicians just spend, spend, spend and then raise our taxes so they can spend some more. I think the Monarchy is a splendid thing, and they do earn their keep, so to speak. God Save the Queen!
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 12-10-2007, 06:47 AM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Parkman View Post
Well, dear Beatrix Fan, may I suggest there is something strange here. You suggest that the British people are subservient? to the Royal Family,??? ie the Queen, etc and at the same time the Queen is nothing but a useless figurehead. You cannot have your cake as it were and eat it too.
I don't want the cake - that's what I've been saying.


Quote:
It is really a question of values or taste.
It's a question of freedom and rights actually. This isn't a guest list for a tea party, it's the way we are governed which is a bit more important. I think you'll find that politicians run the UK, the Queen is there as a bit of glitter. Take the glitter away and you've got a republic.

Quote:
So I suggest that you move to the good old US of A-South Carolina would be perfect, you will just love the month of August here and the local politicians will just transport you to places I cannot mention on the Royal Forums and the stupidity of the citizenry will make you understand why you are there-and I will move to Great Britain and we can both be totally disillusioned. AGAIN. But I will still have pomp, circumstance, tiaras,-just love those tiaras, you know- and some shred of colour and dignity.
And why should I leave my country because I won't grovel to the Windsor crew? Am I any less British because I believe in giving the British people the right to decide?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 12-10-2007, 02:55 PM
QueenMaharet's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Saline, United States
Posts: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
Am I any less British because I believe in giving the British people the right to decide?
I'm quite confused....you say that the Queen has no power, and that parliament and the PM etc. have the power, and you VOTE for which PM you get......right? so what aren't you deciding in terms of who runs the country?

Have you paid attention to what you will actually GET when you switch to a republic? (Other than voting rights that you....already.....have.....?)

Do you want another U.S?

I don't....and I live here......
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 12-10-2007, 03:16 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
I get to decide my Prime Minister but I don't get to decide my Head of State. I have indeed paid attention to what a republic will bring, I've researched it throughly actually and that's why I can say with all due respect that it's rather narrow minded to assume a republic automatically equals the American way of governance. Republics are as varied as monarchies, each system with it's benefits and disadvantages.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 12-10-2007, 03:42 PM
QueenMaharet's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Saline, United States
Posts: 84
Let me see if I understand you. You want to be able to elect the person that represents your country?
Do you want this person to be involved in politics or not?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 12-10-2007, 03:54 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Ok. Here's my ideal;

*A unicameral parliament, thus ridding us of the House of Lords.
*A Prime Minister who heads that unicameral parliament in the same way Gordon Brown currently heads the House of Commons
*Instead of a monarch, an elected President who fufills all the duties of a Head of State but in 4 year terms with a maximum of 2 terms.
*The President would not be a politician
*The President would either be elected by the unicameral parliament or directly by the people. Now this depends on whether we adopt proportional representation or not. If we do, it makes sense for the unicameral parliament to nominate and elect a President because they'd be representing us in doing so. If we stick with the old system of FPTP, then the public would directly elect their President.
*The President would;

-promulgate laws passed by parliament, no longer called the House of Commons but instead called the House of Representatives.
-would be Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces
-would hand out honours and awards on the recommendation of an independant committee
-would host state events and represent Britain abroad
-could dissolve parliament resulting in an immediate referendum or election when asked to dissolve by the Prime Minister or by two thirds of the unicameral chamber
-to advise the Cabinet and the Prime Minister
-to sign international treaties and documents on behalf of the British people

etc etc.

To me, that works. It's achievable, it's sensible, it's modern and it works in other countries. It can work in Britain too.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 12-10-2007, 04:03 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan View Post
-would be Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces
-would hand out honours and awards on the recommendation of an independant committee
No, No, Noooooo. These two sections (above) puzzle me.

Would you seriously put another non military man/woman in charge of our armed forces? The one we have is bad enough although he does appear to be an accomplished liar, IMO. Apart from anything else being only an elected non political official, he/she is open to corruption. At least the US is able to remove their president, how would we?

If you are doing away with the monarchy, why bother with honours and awards?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 12-10-2007, 04:22 PM
QueenMaharet's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Saline, United States
Posts: 84
How would you go about electing someone that is not involved in politics?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
finances, monarchy versus republic


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
A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words Alexandria Royal Chit Chat 24 05-10-2006 05:01 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hohenzollern infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince laurent prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess elisabeth princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen margrethe queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william


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

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV 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 04:26 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]