The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > General Royal Discussion > Royal Chit Chat

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #61  
Old 01-07-2014, 11:38 PM
Duchess of Durham's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Durham, United States
Posts: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandma828 View Post
Members of Congress should be considered contract short term employees, thus they should have to pay for their own health care and they should not receive pensions. That is how the real world works.
I like that idea!!!

I think our congress really needs term limits, and major campaign reform. I really do believe, though I cannot cite any sources, that lawmakers make too many deals with industry or extremely wealthy people. I just do not believe my vote counts for anything, though I still vote.
__________________

__________________
  #62  
Old 01-08-2014, 12:01 AM
Princess Mahala's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: *, United States
Posts: 612
I don't think America needs royals just longer term of the president. every 2 years they start the mess for campaigning, then after elections, complaining. 4 years go fast and not a lot gets fixed but they sure can ruin things in that time lol.
__________________

__________________
  #63  
Old 01-08-2014, 01:49 AM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 7,326
I'm actually enjoying reading this conversation.

I do agree that something should be done about Congress but I think that's up to us (the people) to change Congress. We express our rights to vote but we're voting for the same people who aren't doing their jobs but only looking out for themselves and their political careers. We should start paying attention to those who aren't listening to the American people and understanding their real issues and vote them out, instead of voting for them over and over again.

I'm not sure the answers to our problems is to officially install a Monarchy here in America but for the people of this country to straighten up and fly right and realize real change starts with us and not just the government.
__________________
"If you are always trying to be normal you will never know how amazing you can be."

Dr. Maya Angelou
  #64  
Old 01-08-2014, 02:36 AM
episcogal's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 135
Royalty in the USA would be a disaster, imho.
__________________
  #65  
Old 01-08-2014, 02:09 PM
Royal_Royal's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: City, Denmark
Posts: 70
The United States was created as a Republic, so I think it should stay as a Republic. I think that when a country is rooted in a political system, the system shouldn't be changed. Evolved, yes, but not changed.

Likewise, the Monarchies should stay as Monarchies. And countries like Romania, France and Brazil should return to their original forms of government: Monarchy.
__________________
  #66  
Old 01-09-2014, 06:42 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal_Royal View Post
The United States was created as a Republic, so I think it should stay as a Republic. I think that when a country is rooted in a political system, the system shouldn't be changed. Evolved, yes, but not changed.

Likewise, the Monarchies should stay as Monarchies. And countries like Romania, France and Brazil should return to their original forms of government: Monarchy.
Wasn't pretty much every country in the world a monarchy until the 18th-20th centuries, though? If you look at a map of Europe in 1900, every country was a monarchy except Switzerland and France, which had just become one in 1871 or so.

For "royalty would be a disaster in the US"- perhaps, but I'd be curious to see how royalty worked in the US pre-revolution. Did the UK royal family ever visit the US or have a representative there, like a Governor General? I assume not, but am curious.
__________________
  #67  
Old 01-09-2014, 07:58 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 574
You have 'proto' royalty already.. The Kennedy's, the Bush's/Clintons... You do 'Dynasties', and seem to permanently reaching for something more long term...more 'meaningful'?
Dare i say 'less grubby' than a presidental system, bought and sold by the Corporations, [and lobbies] dressed up as democracy, and bogged down within a couple of years, by Congress or the prospect of the next election..?
__________________
  #68  
Old 01-12-2014, 11:51 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 3
It would be interesting to have a monarchy here
__________________
  #69  
Old 01-13-2014, 01:20 AM
DianneGardner's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Port Orchard, United States
Posts: 3
Here is my thoughts on royalty. I live in the US and yes, we do exalt political figures and often those figures are not warranted of their honor. Every year our constitution seems to crumble. Were there people taught to rule a nation with diplomacy, tact, heart, care and understanding, as many queens and kings have been educated to do, I think our country would not be in the mess it is in. Anyone can be president here. You don't need to know how to negotiate, you don't need to travel and understand how the people of the nation live throughout the country, you don't need to understand how to better the economy or the health of a nation. All you need to do here is know how to get votes. It's become a racket, and a very spiteful one. Promises are made and seldom kept. I would love to see the dignity of a monarchy rule, but I don't think it will ever happen. I hope I don't sound bitter. I know monarchs have had their share of foul play as well and no one system is perfect. Still, there is elegance, art and culture behind a royal family. That's just one opinion and I certainly don't mean to sound like I'm ranting. I love America and its roots.
__________________
  #70  
Old 01-14-2014, 08:07 PM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 464
How about an elective monarchy?

I have, for a long time, thought what it would be like if Poland became an elective monarchy again. The head of state and his or her spouse would be king and queen for life, and the new king or queen would be elected following the death of the incumbent. The king-elect or queen-elect would only become lawful monarch upon coronation. Children of the monarch would bear no titles. This would be entirely in line with the Henrician Articles and the history of Poland. What I haven't figured out yet is who would be eligible for election, but I've got time to fantasize
__________________
  #71  
Old 04-19-2014, 04:51 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 5,448
Interesting.

Presuming you are not jesting:
If you are to have a politically-neutral crowned head of state, why not an American, rather than QEII?
Especially as that would mean that your head of state is a foreigner.
Also, an ever increasing segment of the American population do not have Anglo-Saxon roots, in fact many of them left for America to get away from the British crown. - And other totalitarian monarchies at the time.
On top of that you would have a sovereign that will only visit USA occasionally.

What would be the constitutional role of an American monarch?
Where should the residence of the American monach be located?
__________________
I love work, it absolutely fascinates me. I can sit for hours looking at people working.
  #72  
Old 04-19-2014, 05:49 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 987
Very interesting thread here...........Even though I am a royalist and that is all because of my love of ancient history, anthropology and the study of religion, it would not work in the US. Why, first of all this country fought for it's independence from the British Nation and the system that they have there. If this country from the very beginning had a royal family living here and it continued into today's life like so many in Europe have, then it would be accepted by the people. To start out today and try to change our government to a royal family, well, the American people would never stand for it, it is not something that is ingrained into our minds and spirit, it's not our history. When I have traveled to London and around different countries in Europe, I love the history and read lots of books about where I am going.........I want to see the places and the museums and all that encompasses their history. We don't really have the history nor the length of time that Europe and the rest of the world has, this country is a baby yet trying to find it's way. In Denmark alone, I read somewhere (can't remember which book) that the Queen today can trace her family history back 900 years....my goodness........we aren't anywhere even near that in age. We just don't have that type of history and besides Americans today are very independent in spirit..........

There is so much wrong right now in our government and the unrest has started, if things don't change and our government doesn't listen to the people, then it will get worse here. One thing I do know for sure in reading history that*all nations, kingdoms, empires and world powers do fall down to dust and decay simply because the ones in power forget the people that put them in power*, it seems only the British Empire to a certain degree still has some of their territory such as Canada and etc. The Netherlands has some territory in the Caribbean and what else I really don't remember at this point.

It will never happen here, and that is one word I don't use lightly, *never*!

Besides look at the different types of people from around the world that come here on a daily basis trying to get away from civil unrest, and corrupt governments not knowing that all isn't well here either.

I am an American and not ashamed to be a royalist because of my love of history as taught me that having a monarchy is not all bad, as long as it helps, defends, and supports the entire people, not just the wealthy and rich and privileged. I am for all of the people as a whole, and yet I still think a monarchy is okay if it works for all of the people.

Another point is location, Europe is divided, most countries aren't the size of this country, there are many different cultures, monies, holidays, religions just to name a few differences, here, it's like we are almost one and the same as I can go to any state and find the same thing here where I live, no difference. I wonder if there is any place in Europe that sells my coffee, Kona coffee from Hawaii and believe me that is all I drink in the way of coffee, I never buy coffee from any store or place that sells it, it's always made fresh here at home...........when I travel I take my coffee pot and grounds and make it.......just picky I guess about coffee. Sorry if this is too long, I shut up now!
__________________
  #73  
Old 07-03-2014, 07:46 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,359
I for one think my country is doing just fine without a monarchy. We should continue going forward not backwards.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
  #74  
Old 07-03-2014, 08:15 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,091
No. It would never be tolerated here. It's not needed anyway.



LaRae
__________________
  #75  
Old 07-03-2014, 08:18 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,533
No. We got rid of that problem in 1776. And we neither need it nor want it.
__________________
  #76  
Old 07-03-2014, 11:41 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
I thought we had an incipient monarchy spread among the Bushes and Clintons. They are saying Jeb Bush might run, and of course Hillary Clinton might run, and Hillary Clinton's daughter Chelsea is active in support of her mother. We were heading for a possible Kennedy monarchy but sadly one by one the heirs were killed. There isn't a strong heir now, but Jack Kennedy's grandson John Kennedy Schlossberg is now in college and is said to be strongly interested in running for President some day. If I were a Kennedy I would not run, considering the past problems.
__________________
  #77  
Old 07-03-2014, 11:55 PM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 7,326
I think it would be an interesting change but America wouldn't go for it. I do think of our First Family as our own royal family that's limited to 4 to 8 years.

I think the American people honor our ties and history with the British royal family though. We help celebrate their celebrations, pay our respects in times of sorrows and hold on to hope for the future of the Monarchy. We're also crazy about Elizabeth II and give and her family a very warm welcome whenever they come and officially visit.
__________________
"If you are always trying to be normal you will never know how amazing you can be."

Dr. Maya Angelou
  #78  
Old 07-13-2014, 02:03 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 101
I think a better option would be to invite a suitable prince or princess to become King or Queen, like Norway in 1905. A Canadian system is not ideal if you want a high profile, apolitical head of state. It's all very well to focus on the benefits of the Queen, but you will hardly ever see her. It is the Governor-General who will exercise the royal prerogatives and carry out the ceremonial duties of the sovereign. The Queen represents Canada to the world about as much as she represents the Solomon Islands, Belize, Jamaica etc. etc. That is, not at all. It is the Prime Minister who will get all the focus as the nations representative on the world stage. Most likely the Prime Minister will also have a much higher profile domestically than the Governor-General. I'm not sure about Canada, but in Australia a Prime Minister, regardless of political persuasion, can always be relied upon to keep the Governor -General in the shadows. So you would be back where you began, with yet another politician.
__________________
  #79  
Old 07-13-2014, 04:14 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 101
Quote:
a Head of State whom we share with 16 other independent countries because she is their Queen too and that links us all together amazingly and most valuably
I don't know what is so valuable about sharing the same person as head of state. We still have to join the foreigner's queue at Heathrow; it's the EU citizens who get the preferential treatment.
__________________
  #80  
Old 07-13-2014, 05:31 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,373
I can't see why any of the Commonwealth Realms would want to share their Head of State with the US. I also can't see how the US joining the Commonwealth Nations would be advantageous to the already existing Nations. Not that there is any problem with the US, but it's too large and powerful of a nation. One of the advantages of the Commonwealth is that it gives small and middle-sized nations a voice on an international stage in a manner that would normally be overlooked by the larger nations. If you introduced the US to the mix it would be to the disadvantage of those smaller nations.

If the US wants to become a monarchy again (although this push seems to be based on an incredibly naive understanding of both monarchies and American politics) then it is welcome to do so, but it would be better off to go the route of introducing its own monarch - from an American family or a lesser royal from a European Royal family (either ruling or not).
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread

Tags
monarchist, politics, royal, royalist tea party, united states


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
Which country is likely to become a monarchy (again), and why? Lox General Royal Discussion 316 08-06-2014 01:08 PM
Harald & Sonja Visit the United States 2005 pdas1201 King Harald and Queen Sonja 38 03-08-2005 05:00 PM




Popular Tags
abdication belgium birth carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events fashion germany grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit ottoman pregnancy president hollande prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit stockholm sweden the hague visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:35 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]