The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #61  
Old 04-30-2017, 07:10 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Posts: 6
Like I said in one of my previous comments, the peereges would be granted to already accomplished individuals with long history of service to the society, who are beyond needing to be bestowed any favours upon them. And anyway the position of monarch would not be one that would greatly benefited you. You would have to leave your private life behind, as does ERII now, and devote the rest of your life to beeing the head of state. If you still need to make a political career or money, the position of monarch is not going to be that helpfull to you, its a commitment above all else. And I am sure there would be some relevant, competent candidate among the peers, who would do the job just fine.

Yes, the hereditary succesion is as fast and easy as it gets. Its a matter of preference for British people, its their choice. As long as people are ok with having hereditary dynastic head of state, it will work just fine. Once they are not though, but they would still want to call themselves the United Kingdom, my proposal, or something similar, would be a possible alternative.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 04-30-2017, 07:14 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 2,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Bohemia View Post
Also the current queen Elisabeth appears pretty bland to me. I have never seen her do anything out of the ordinary, she is beeign driven arround and waves at people, I watched her speeches, they are all spineless and shallow, written by other people, she probably never said a word of her own to the general public. If thats not bland I dont know what is. People connect with people they like, queen Elisabeth is well liked, people connect with her.
Elizabeth II: (I posted this in another thread, but it's fits here to)

Her Ipsos MORI approval ratings were above 70% from 1992 to 2000 (with the exception of 66% in 1998), over 80% from 2002 to 2016 (sometimes 90%) just 5% dissatisfied in 2016, a YouGov approval rating in 2012 showed 86%.

2. And let's go through the YouGov most admired person in the UK poll:

2014 - The 30 most admired persons in the UK:
1: The Queen with 18,74%
9: William with 2,6%
19: Kate with 0,80%
Harry was not even included in the poll.

2015 - The 15 most admired Women in the UK:
1: The Queen with 17%
5: Kate with 5,2%

2015 - The 15 most admired Men in the UK:
5: William with 6,5%
8: Harry with 5,9%

2016 - The 30 most admired Women in the UK:
1: The Queen with 19,5%
7: Kate with 3,6%

2016 - The 30 most admired Men in the UK:
4: Harry with 6,4%
6: William with 5,6%

The Queen was also polled the most admirred woman in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Germany in the 2016 poll. She is (as experts says) the most popular head of state (many would say person) in the world.

So yes, she is as you wrore ''well liked'', but she is also beloved.

3. QEII is the reigning monarch of 16 countries - including the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. She is head of the Commonwealth and is in that capacity figurehead for 2 billion people. She has reigned for 65 years. This makes her the world's most Iconic, famous and well-known head of state (many will say person).

4. She traveled around the UK until she was 86. She used to be driven along the crowds in the Queenmobile (open car) from 1952 to 2012 (did it in 2016 on the occasion of her 90th birthday). Went on several walkabout (walked through the crowds with her smile) from 1970 to 2013. (did it in 2016 on the occasion of 90th birthday). She traveled around the Commonwealth/world from 1952 to 2011 (Italy, France Germany and Malta in 2014/2015). She is known for her kindness and there are so many touching stories about her. She comforts her employees, traumatized aid workers etc.

Our beloved, iconic, remarkable Elizabeth II is the UK and the Commonwealth and she is as Obama said (last year) a jewel to the world.

She is an international icon and the embodiment of royalty. She has dedicated her life to the UK and the Commonwealth, and have spent the last 63 years building relations and friendship between nations as no other. She's was known as the world's top diplomat until at least 2011 (when she almost stopped traveling) She was also with her parents, sister and Winston Churchill a symbol of peace during World War II.

She is as several of the so-called experts said on British/American/Canadian television during her 90th birthday celebrations and Jubilee celebrations in 2012 a symbol of continuity and goodness in the world. And as Baroness Scotland said during an interview: She is kind, caring, warm, forgiving and concerned with poor people, young people and people who are struggling.

Monarchs, Presidents, former Prime Ministers, former employees and family member have said the same and the Queen herself has mentioned it several times in her speeches over the years.

She is simply THE QUEEN and world leders around the world admirer her, and she make me proud to be half-British. We should be proud to live in this admirable lady's reign.

There will be no one like her again, and I agree with Tony Parsons that she will be the last monarch who will be a truly unifying force in our nation, but the monarchy will continue to endure in to future with Charles, William and George.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Bohemia View Post
Prince Charles is not liked at all, people dont connect with him. Doesnt matter if you are royal or not, have you ever seen a rally of american presidents? They are elected and many people connect with them just fine. They might not have 80% approval like Queen Elisabeth, but I am sure Prince Charles wont have either.
Charles: Around 70% approval ratings and 60% thinks he's going to be a good king? Not bad for a man who has received so much criticism. And he ia actually wery good at conecting with people - have you seen him on a walkabout?

The British Monarchy: Record high support in several polls since 2002, some of over 80%. And as I said in my other post, why change a system that has 70-80% (sometimes over 80%) support in the population (that's the case in the UK, Denmark and Norway) and according to many constitutional experts, the best system one can have.

American presidents:

1. The American political system is completely broken.

2. The President of the United States is a politician.

3. They are lucky if they gets 50% approval.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
King Willem-Alexander is popular and relevant in the Netherlands, not least because of his choice of wife - what if he had been bypassed?
You and your amazing posts! Agrees that King Willem Alexander is popular, but his 70% approval ratings are far lower than those of Queen Elizabeth II, (80-90%) King Harald V (80-95%), Queen Margrethe II (75-80%), Frederik and Mary (above 80%). Even Haakon and Mette-Marit (who have lost a lot of their popularity) have higher approval ratings than Willem Alexander. The Dutch monarchy has also lost support after he took over, but it now seems to have recovered.
__________________

__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 04-30-2017, 07:34 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Bohemia View Post

Prince Charles is not liked at all, people dont connect with him.
Did you see the way he and Camilla were mobbed in Italy on his recent tour?

Hardly an example of a person with whom 'people don't connect'?
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 04-30-2017, 07:53 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 9,646
I hope you are not too discouraged, Prince of Bohemia.

You are after all among hardcore monarchists and it's far from the first time the idea of electing a monarch has come up, but there is a reason why the system with a born heir has been around since basically forever.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 04-30-2017, 07:54 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 2,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Did you see the way he and Camilla were mobbed in Italy on his recent tour?

Hardly an example of a person with whom 'people don't connect'?
I haven't seen so much interest from people for a royal tour since their visit to Sydney in 2015, where they drev bigger crowds that William/Kate and Harry.

But people who don't follow him don't know that. They haven't seen him on his many walkabouts in the UK, on his visits to Canada, Australia and new Zealand.

They see him as a boring, distant and cold man who was mean to Diana.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 04-30-2017, 08:10 PM
WreathOfLaurels's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Bohemia View Post
I specificaly said there that electing the monarch from royal family would be pointless.
My idea was actualy that all peers of UK would be eligible to be elected, not just the members of HoL, but I noticed I didnt specify that in the post.
Taking into consideration the fact that the hereditary peers no longer sit in the HoL after Tony Blairs reforms in 1999, the pool of candidates you are referring to are the life peers, the majority of whom are former MP's who have been "kicked upstairs" so to speak or party donors, or the odd honoured citizen? This is starting to sound very like the method of choosing the president in Italy or Germany...
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 04-30-2017, 09:22 PM
WreathOfLaurels's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
My own country elected it's kings for 700 years until 1660. But that was at a time when monarchs had power and it was necessary, crucial even to ensure that the line of succession was in place, simply to avoid pretenders and civil war - or invasions.

That's not an issue now, so that argument can't be used in today's world.

The argument about absolutism doesn't hold water. Absolute absolutism doesn't work, it has never worked for more than at most a few generations. Too much depends on one person.
Which is of course why Absolutism was replaced - or the monarchy booted out.
Instead most monarchs in history have had to work within the framework of a law, the limitations of alliances and political necessities. When they failed to do so, they often ended up dead or in exile.

So we are back to square one, what you are proposing is not a monarchy, but a president with a different title.
Absolutism in the sense of one person rule never existed. It's a historical myth. Monarchies in the early modern period did take on greater adminsitive responsibilities compared to their medieval counterparts post reformation and post gunpowder warfare but in practice varying forms of aristocratic oligarchy with the monarch holding more or less executive power depending on local conditions was the norm and cooperation with local elites in the absence of professional civil servants and popular sovereignty was a prerequisite for effective enforcement of policy and tax gathering. In other words, the king did what his elites wanted or had to persuade them that reform was in their interestes NOT the other way around. Maintaing the pretence of divine backed royal rule was tied to the need to avoid the awkward question of opening up the policial system, the role of hereditary wealth and inheritance. You may notice that this smoke and mirrors routine became less workable once capitalism and urbanisation take hold. On top of that more often than not the whole old order - Ancien Regime - would either find themselves out of work, or needing to adapt very quickly, not just the monarchs. Transferring your power base from the triad of church, military, loyal peasants and landowners to Financiers, Industrialists, Intellectuals, and the middle class can be done but its very difficult and most monarchies collapsed not from refusing to change but when they tried to make the transition and in effect fell between these two camps.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 04-30-2017, 09:44 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 7,376
Quote:
Originally Posted by WreathOfLaurels View Post
Absolutism in the sense of one person rule never existed. It's a historical myth. Monarchies in the early modern period did take on greater adminsitive responsibilities compared to their medieval counterparts post reformation and post gunpowder warfare but in practice varying forms of aristocratic oligarchy with the monarch holding more or less executive power depending on local conditions was the norm and cooperation with local elites in the absence of professional civil servants and popular sovereignty was a prerequisite for effective enforcement of policy and tax gathering. In other words, the king did what his elites wanted or had to persuade them that reform was in their interestes NOT the other way around. Maintaing the pretence of divine backed royal rule was tied to the need to avoid the awkward question of opening up the policial system, the role of hereditary wealth and inheritance. You may notice that this smoke and mirrors routine became less workable once capitalism and urbanisation take hold. On top of that more often than not the whole old order - Ancien Regime - would either find themselves out of work, or needing to adapt very quickly, not just the monarchs. Transferring your power base from the triad of church, military and landowners to Financiers, Industrialists, Intellectuals, and the middle class can be done but its very difficult and most monarchies collapsed not from refusing to change but when they tried to make the transition and in effect fell between these two camps.
You are absolutely correct. A monarch depended/depends on a support of power brokers and courtiers.
__________________

__________________
"I never did mind about the little things"
Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
monarchy, monarchy versus republic, united kingdom


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
Hereditary Prince Alois (1968- ), Princess Sophie (1967- ) and Family Mandy Princely Family of Liechtenstein 272 08-21-2017 11:07 AM
Hereditary Grand Duke Jean and Princess Joséphine-Charlotte of Belgium 1953 Hannelore Royal Weddings 24 09-09-2016 05:40 AM
Hereditary Grand Duke Henri of Luxembourg and María Teresa Mestre y Batista: Feb 1981 Cathérine Bergeyck Royal Weddings 91 02-14-2013 09:02 AM
The Next Hereditary Grand Duchess of Luxembourg destiny Hereditary Grand Duke Guillaume & Hereditary Grand Duchess Stéphanie 496 04-29-2010 10:42 PM
HRH Hereditary Prince Bernhard von Baden & Stephanie Kaul 2001 Elsa M. Weddings: Non-Reigning Houses & Nobility 14 09-09-2009 03:16 PM




Popular Tags
albania belgian state visit to japan best gown september 2016 best outfit birthday carl gustaf countess of snowdon crown princess mary crown princess mary cocktail dresses crown princess mary eveningwear crown princess mary fashion denmark duchess of cambridge duke of cambridge dutch state visit elia zaharia fashion poll hereditary grand duchess stéphanie's fashion & style jewels king abdullah ii king carl gustaf and queen silvia king willem-alexander lists monarchy november 2016 october 2016 picture of the week picture of the week november 2016 pierre casiraghi prince charles prince harken in canada princess diana lady spencer princess mary princess mary fashion princess sofia princess sofias hats princess sofia style queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia cocktail dresses queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia eveningwear queen letizia fashion queen letizia gala dresses queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania australia november 2016 queen rania dresses queen rania fashion romania royal wedding september 2016 state visit successes succession sweden the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats tiara


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- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:53 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises