If the United States was to become a Monarchy....

[SantoSubito]

How would we go about finding a monarch since the US has never had a royal house? Would we simply steal some of the British royal family? Elect a monarch and then make it hereditary from there on? Or simply offer a non-reigning royal house in Europe the opportunity to reign again?

Just to be clear I ask this for purely theoretical reasons. I'm about as dyed in the wool republican as you can get. Thanks in advance.

[Sunnystar]

I can't imagine the US ever becoming a monarchy. But if that were to come to pass... I'd say that we steal someone from the British Royal Family, simply because they are the most well-known Royal Family in the world and, once upon a time, before the Revolutionary War, the original 13 colonies were British. But, it couldn't be just any random, lesser member of the BRF, like the Queen's cousins. Maybe Edward or possibly Anne. Probably not Andrew (too many scandals and Fergie) and I can't imagine Harry would accept the job.

If not the BRF then the next option would probably be the Grimaldis of Monaco. The theory, I'm guessing, would be that they at least have some American blood in their veins thanks to Princess Grace.

And then, I suppose a third argument would be someone from the Hawaiian Royal Family, if anyone is still alive.

It's an interesting question, though entirely, completely hypothetical.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Never going to happen, the issue was resolved 235.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi

Never going to happen, the issue was resolved 235.

What do you mean by 235?

Funny idea.

Say USA became an empire, with the emperor in the White House, with some states ruled by a governor general and others by their own princely houses.
Who among present day society and political elite would be the first you would point to? Who would be obvious and who would you like to see?
I realise of course that some may be fairly unknown outside USA.

[wanderingnana]

First of all, I think she meant 235 years ago we solved that problem. In answer to your second part, this would never happen. We like the system we have, thank you- if we don't like what they are doing, we vote em out in four years. You can't do that with a king or emperor. I know that it is fun to read about the royal families and what they are doing and all that, but we really don't want to go back to being an adjunct of a monarchy or having one=been there, done that. not doing it again

[Osipi]

Well.. saying that the long shot pays off and the US does become a monarchy...

I would think that they'd go for royalty close to home. One probability would be descendants of Lisa Maria as we all know her father Elvis was King and for a while there she was married to the King of Pop. Come to think of it, one of Jackson's son's name is Prince.

On the other hand, we also do have a Queen Latifah.

[Banchelor]

i don't believe that would happen
and i only like old royal families the others are just wannabes
i like UAE leading family but i don't see them as royals

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by wanderingnana

You can't do that with a king or emperor.

You can, if you have King's or Queen's that switch every 4 years. Malaysia elects a ruler every 5 years.

It's interesting how the first theory is to "steal someone from the British Royal Family", I don't see how they have any greater experience to rule the USA than any other royal family.

[wanderingnana]

Well, what kind of monarcy are you looking at? If you are looking at the British Monarchy and several of the others, they don't rule, they reign. So if we were going for that kind, we would still need a prime minister or premier to do the actual governing along with a parliament or congress, so what exactly would be the point of having a monarch? If it is only to go around opening hospitals etc., quite frankly that would be a waste of our money and enough of it is being wasted already.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

You can, if you have King's or Queen's that switch every 4 years. Malaysia elects a ruler every 5 years.

It's interesting how the first theory is to "steal someone from the British Royal Family", I don't see how they have any greater experience to rule the USA than any other royal family.

When there were only 13 colonies George III was their King and the present BRF are his senior line descendents - so they are the logical choice.

They could do what Canada, Australia and other countries do - share the British monarch with Britain.

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

When there were only 13 colonies George III was their King and the present BRF are his senior line descendents - so they are the logical choice.

They could do what Canada, Australia and other countries do - share the British monarch with Britain.

Yeah when the USA was 13 colonies and not one of the biggest and most powerful countries in the world. Sharing the monarchy like in Australia isn't working out too well at the moment.
Just because they are 'well known' and just because 192 years ago George III ruled the USA or it's 13 colonies, doesn't make the BRF a logical choice in my opinion, as nowadays they know nothing of the country itself.

[wanderingnana]

Well, this is a moot subject, cause it ain't gonna happen folks

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

Yeah when the USA was 13 colonies and not one of the biggest and most powerful countries in the world.

What is your point?

Sharing the monarchy like in Australia isn't working out too well at the moment.

Please explain this comment. I live in Australia and haven't heard that things are going badly here because we share a monarch with the UK. Could you please explain how sharing the monarch is affecting us.

Just because they are 'well known' and just because 192 years ago George III ruled the USA or it's 13 colonies, doesn't make the BRF a logical choice in my opinion, as nowadays they know nothing of the country itself.

It was 235 years ago, not 192.

You are entitled to your opinion, of course, just as I am entitled to mine.

George III was the last King of the original states - which is why his descendents would be the logical choice to me. The BRF know a great deal more about the country, and other countries around the world than probably any family on earth - simply because most of them have visited it both on holidays and officially and have been visited by numerous leading people from the US.

If they were to re-establish the monarchy in Russia who would be the logical family to be put into that position - the Romanovs - why - because they had held the position before.

[Lady74]

Don't know how Australia got into this thread but anyway we are going very well with our Queen of Australia thank you very much

[Patra]

The US would never have a monarchy, our country was founded as a revolution against a monarch!

[CSENYC]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

When there were only 13 colonies George III was their King and the present BRF are his senior line descendents - so they are the logical choice.

They could do what Canada, Australia and other countries do - share the British monarch with Britain.

Agreed. I wouldn't mind that. The British Royal Family was our royal family, although how connected were they to the US- did they even visit or have an official residence?

I cannot think of any "distinguished" citizens in the US who I'd want as a King or Queen. It's so difficult to find someone who is completely nonpartisan, and having a partisan political person appointed to a hereditary position as head of state would just not work.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

It's interesting how the first theory is to "steal someone from the British Royal Family", I don't see how they have any greater experience to rule the USA than any other royal family.

At one time, there were rumors that the sovereignty of the USA would be offered to Charles Stuart "Bonnie Prince Charlie." Of course, there was also talk of making George Washington the king. Fortunately, nothing came of it.

[Daria_S]

I'm a monarchist and a royalist, and I will say, that I don't see any sort of monarchy working for the United States. People are too republican and are proud of the fact that they kicked out the British all those years ago (I personally feel that it was a mistake, because if we were still a British colony, we would have some culture and sophistication, which US in general lacks).

[grevinnan]

The land on which today U.S.A. sits has a very long history and did not start with the kicking out of the Brittish. A reading of the history of Luisiana will find both French and Spanish royalties. Hawaii had a monarchy. Our native american tribes had chiefs.

Although establishing a monarchy today is not likely the forefathers to our current citizens had a much more interesting and coloful past than most people have discovered.

[CSENYC]

Originally Posted by Daria_S

I'm a monarchist and a royalist, and I will say, that I don't see any sort of monarchy working for the United States. People are too republican and are proud of the fact that they kicked out the British all those years ago (I personally feel that it was a mistake, because if we were still a British colony, we would have some culture and sophistication, which US in general lacks).

You live in NYC, one of the global capitals of culture and high-end restaurants, shopping, etc., and think that the US lacks culture/sophistication? Maybe if we had a stronger connection with the UK, we'd have as much culture as, say, Bermuda or the Falkland Islands?

I can see saying that having a royal family would add some glamor to government- we sure don't have that.