Popularity of the Monarchy in Sweden

[Moonmaiden23]

It's no secret that Daniel was not CG's first choice for Victoria, but surely the King must now see that Daniel has turned into a huge asset for the SRF and that can only help the Swedish monarchy in the long run.

It beggars belief that he would give thumbs up to Sofia Hellqvist(as has been reported), but would have a problem with the modest, hardworking, former successful businessman that is Daniel Westling.

The bond between Daniel and Queen Silvia seems deep and obvious, she appears to adore him.

 

[Loyalist]

It's no secret that Daniel was not CG's first choice for Victoria, but surely the King must now see that Daniel has turned into a huge asset for the SRF and that can only help the Swedish monarchy in the long run.

It beggars belief that he would give thumbs up to Sofia Hellqvist(as has been reported), but would have a problem with the modest, hardworking, former successful businessman that is Daniel Westling.

The bond between Daniel and Queen Silvia seems deep and obvious, she appears to adore him.

I wonder what the local Swedish aristocracy think of the new royal in laws

 

[Anne2]

Wow Daniel got the most!?

Tonight, congratulations to Daniel have over 72000 supporting "I like".

While the Te Deum on Sundays has 4335, the launch of the commeration festvities by Pr Cristina has 2200, the Jubileum concert has over 5000, and the festivities at the Royal Palace on Sunday have 8868....

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Loyalist I don't know for certain, but I've heard rumors of complete disgust and that they(the aristocracy) don't take the Swedish monarchy seriously anymore..

 

[Anne2]

I have already heard that as well. It is however difficult to analyze that info. It is to be suspected that it comes mainly from anti-royalists. How to define "aristocracy"?

 

[LadyFinn]

More and more people want the king to leave the throne

Dagens Nyheter (DN) and Ipsos made an opinion poll.
Question 1: There is now a debate of the roll of the monarchy in Sweden. What do you think, should the monarchy be retained or abolished?
Question 2: Do you think it's time for the king to hand over the throne to Victoria so that she becomes queen or should the king remain on the throne?

Swedish people's verdict: Time to hand over the throne, the king. For the first time there are more who want Crown Princess Victoria take over now - than that the king shall remain. Meanwhile, opposition to the monarchy increases, according to a new survey.
The king traveled around Sweden to celebrate his 40 years on the throne. But it has not strengthened his position. According to the poll of those surveyed, 48 % want the king to hand over the throne, while 39 % want him to remain. It is the first time that the percentage who want the king step off is greater than the group who want him to stay. In May 2011 it was 41 % who wanted the king to hand over to Victoria, while 44 % wanted him to continue as head of state.
And the change has been rapid. As late as February 2010, 64 % of respondents said that the king should remain.
- That more people want Victoria to take over the throne may be an expression of dissatisfaction how the king does his work. But it may also be that as the king gets older and Victoria grows into her role the change of the regent becomes more natural and obvious, says Johanna Laurin Gulled, public opinion analyst at Ipsos.

The support for the monarchy has also reduced. Now 64 % want to keep the monarchy, compared to 80 % when Ipsos started their measurements in January 2005. The biggest change since the last survey in May 2011 is that the opposition to the monarchy increases, now 27 % want to abolish the monarchy, increased by 6 %. When the last survey was conducted in May 2011, the king was under fire. It had been published details of alleged infidelity and his friends' contacts with criminals.
- Now there is no similar event that could have influenced the support for the monarchy, says Johanna Laurin Gulled.
Young people are significantly more negative about the monarchy than the older ones.
- There is a clear age difference. If there really is a generational issue, that they retain their opinion later on, it will be seen in the support for the monarchy, but we can only speculate about today, says Laurin Gulled.
Allt fler vill att kungen ska lämna tronen - DN.SE
Translation

Ewa Stenberg writes at her column in DN (you have to be registrated to read the whole column)
The Swedish people have not turned a page in it's support for King Carl Gustaf. More and more people want to abolish the monarchy and the Crown Princess has now a greater support for the throne than the king. Such a shift could strengthen support for the monarchy in Sweden.
Ewa Stenberg Ett skifte kan öka stödet för monarkin - DN.SE

Expressen about the poll: The majority wants the king to resign
Majoritet vill att kungen avgår Nyheter Expressen

Aftonbladet about the poll: The verdict: Leave the throne, king. The Swedish people want to see a queen on the throne.
Domen Lämna tronen, kungen Nyheter Aftonbladet

This is very interesting. The results show that the king's nice celebrations don't have had an effect to his popularity. Or if they have, the figures must have been really low in the summer...

Svenska Dagbladet about the poll: More people want Victoria to take over
Fler vill att Victoria tar över Inrikes SvD

 

[marine2109]

Kings in trouble: Now the Swedes and Spaniards of them

Konger i knibe: Nu vil svenskerne og spanierne af med dem - Royale | www.bt.dk

https://translate.google.com.tr/tra...il-svenskerne-og-spanierne-af-med-dem&act=url

 

[LadyFinn]

Expressen has asked Demoskop to make a poll
The question was:
King Carl Gustaf turns 68 on April 30. Do you think he should retire, renounce the throne and transfer it to Victoria?
* Yes 48 %
* No 47 %
* No answer 5 %
Number of respondents: 1,011 people over 18 years, weighted by gender, age and party.

In 2011 only 38 % wanted the king to retire and 60 % wanted him to continue as the king.

Anders Lindholm, CEO of Demoskop:
- He has gotten older and at some point you should quit your work. It's not unnatural that people think so. Naturally the numbers increase, the older king gets. This is also a reflection of how incredibly popular Crown Princess Victoria is as a royal person.
Sören Holmberg, professor and political scientist:
- It has been three years since the last poll. It may simply be that he has gotten older, people think it's natural that he would retire. Get the chance to enjoy and pass on to Victoria. I have difficulties to see that the king would abdicate. That tradition is not within the Bernadotte family.
Lennart Nilsson, Associate Professor of Public Administration at the University of Gothenburg:
- "The reluctant monarch" -book definitely lowered the confidence for the king. The King turned the page, but the Swedes didn't. The Crown Princess has strong support and without her probably the figures for the royal family would have been completely different.
There has been two abdications in Europe.
Albert Nieboer, a royal photographer, who follows royals worldwide:
- Since Willem-Alexander became king, it is no longer as conservative. There is a younger generation and people love this change of a regent. People's love to former Queen Beatrix has not decreased, on the contrary. Since Philippe became king, he has a different confidence. Earlier, he went in his father's shadow. Now he stands on his own feet and also he has got new love of the people since he became regent.
Annika Sönnerberg from the court press department says to Expressen:
- We have no comments on the survey.

Johan T Lindwall says on the video that this poll comes as a cold shower for the king just when he is becoming a grandfather again. His popularity is lowest ever. Lindwall also thinks that the people don't like the way the king acts with people, he is sometimes quite arrogant. And Victoria is becoming more and more popular with the Swedes who see that she would do a wonderful job. One problem is that the king doesn't take the results of these kind of polls seriously, like Victoria and Daniel would do if they would get these kind of figures. After the abdications in Europe there came debate in Sweden if the king should abdicate. The king has no plan to abdicate, he has born to be king and will be king as long as he lives. Maybe the king should abdicate when he is 75, there is seven years to that. Lindwall has spoken with people from the Netherlands and Belgium. Willem-Alexander and Beatrix are both now more popular than ever. Lindwall says that Victoria can't become more popular since her popularity is sky high but the king could increase his popularity if he would say "This day in year XX I will leave the throne to my daughter" and the people's confidence in the king and in monarchy would increase.
Svenska folket Ta över i år Victoria Nyheter Expressen
Translation

Fler vill se Victoria ta över Inrikes TT Senaste nytt Aftonbladet

 

[LadyFinn]

Johan T Lindwall:
"Therefore the king refuses to hand over the throne"

Another poll Demoskop made for Expressen:
Question: When do you think the king should leave the throne to Victoria?
Number of respondents: 1,011 people over 18 years, weighted by gender, age and party.
Answers:
* Within 5 years 50%
* When the king dies 27%
* Within 10 years 12%
* No answer 7%
* Within 15 years 3%
* Within 20 years 2%

The confidence for the king is collapsing and the Swedish people want Victoria take the throne. Forget that he abdicates. The King does not seem to think it's something fun anymore to be king. Neither the Swedish people seem to think that he has especially fun or doing a good job.
Expressen with Demoskop view additional new figures on the declining support for the king with the question "When do you think the king should leave the throne to Victoria?".
A full 50 percent responded within five years. Three years ago, only 43 percent who thought the same thing.
What does this say? Why the confidence for the king decreases?
I would say that it mainly depends on three things:
1. Victoria's immense popularity.
Crown Princess does a fantastic PR-work for the royal family and not even a crack in the foot and crutches prevents her from, for example, do official work in Germany. Anywhere with a smile that charmed everyone. Obviously, those who are for a monarchy like to see her as soon as possible on the throne as the queen.
2. Abdications in Holland and Belgium.
In 2013 two royal houses in Europe handed over to the younger generation. Many people think that it could also happen in Sweden.
3. The king's arrogance.
The king seems not to have learned from history and neither he seems to think it is especially fun anymore at work. He seems to suffer on his trips, everything seems to be tiresome. When the news of Madeleine expecting a child came, he met the media with banter and nonchalance. Completely unacceptable. Later, he claimed that it was "a joke". I am convinced that it was not. He was asked in SVT's annual program, "does he regret anything?" he answered quickly: "Not a thing!".
Maybe a little more humility and joy? The king will never abdicate. He is fully committed to it is a mission for life. Pity.
If the king would be little more open in his mind, he would realize one thing: Swedish royal family has a great asset. It's Crown Princess Victoria.
Därför vägrar kungen att lämna över tronen Johan T Lindwall
Translation

 

[LadyFinn]

Swedish royal expert Roger Lundgren has commented the polls and as usual, he tries to be so polite and not say anything negative of any royal.

"But it's not so much that the Swedes are losing interest in the king, rather that they're falling more in love with Crown Princess Victoria", says Roger Lundgren, royal expert and editor of Kungliga Magazine.
"Swedes love Victoria. She is Sweden's most popular person and everyone adores her," he told The Local, adding that the birth of Princess Estelle in 2012 did nothing but boost Victoria's popularity in Sweden and the world.
"Plus Victoria is young, and besides, everyone likes something new."
Half of Swedes want Victoria on the throne - The Local

"Victoria is young". No, she isn't young, but she is younger than the king.

I'm very worried about the future of the swedish monarchy. Now it feels that the only ones who have understood the situation are Victoria and Daniel. They are working for the future of the monarchy. They have understood that if the common swedish people don't support the monarchy, the monarchy will be abolished very soon. Five years ago I was certain that I will see queen Victoria of Sweden sometime in my life. Now I'm not sure of that anymore.

 

[Baron Brockdorf]

Bunte has an article saying that Victoria might never been queen because the politicians are pushing for a republic in sweden I know bunte isn't very reliable....but is there any truth in it?
Victoria of Sweden: Will she ever queen? | BUNTE.de

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Bunte is just a scandal rag and is not to be taken serious at all.

 

[LadyFinn]

Bunte has an article saying that Victoria might never been queen because the politicians are pushing for a republic in sweden I know bunte isn't very reliable....but is there any truth in it?
Victoria of Sweden: Will she ever queen? | BUNTE.de

Bunte is quoting an article in Aftonbladet. In Aftonbladet's online elections have 563 of 600 parliamentary candidates with chance of getting into parliament responded to the question "Should we keep the royal family?". 40 percent answered no.
Parliamentary candidates who are younger than 40 years are more radical. Among them answered a majority (50.5 percent) no. Most of the young candidates in Feminist Initiative, Liberal People's Party, Green Party, Social Democratic Party and Left Party want to abolish the monarchy. However, among the young candidates in Christian Democrats, Centre Party, Moderate Party and Sweden Democrats is no majority against the royal family. In the candidates of Christian Democrats and Sweden Democrats isn't any anti-royalists at all.
Freddy Grip from the Left Party: The Head of State shall be appointed by the law, not intercourse.
The Liberal Party is the only party in the alliance which most of the young people doing the thumbs down for the king. Democracy Minister Birgitta Ohlsson, former chairman of the Republican Association, said: It is unfashionable to inherit the office.
The young Liberal People's Party candidates are more radical than their older peers. As many as 69 percent of young Liberal People's Party candidates were to abolish the royal family, while only 45 percent of all Liberals want to scrap the monarchy.
At the Social Democratic Party is a marked difference between young and older candidates. 58 percent of young S-candidates dislike the king, against only 44 percent of the entire group.
- Our head of state should be elected by the Swedish people, as political office must be open to all on equal terms, says Kristoffer Lindberg from Social Democratic Party.
Even among the young Social Democrats who want to keep the royal family is a clear skepticism:
- I can live with a royal family, but want to have a clearer openness and examination of the apanage, says Fredrik Lundh Sammeli.
The S-noticed political scientist Ulf Bjereld does not think the royal family will be abolished soon:
- One thing is to be against the royal family when you fill in a questionnaire, another thing is to push the issue when you find yourself in the position of power.
The director of the court's press department, Margareta Thorgren: The Royal Family feels strong support from the Swedish people. We simply have to communicate better the benefits and the great work that the Swedish royal family does for Sweden.
Unga politiker Skrota monarkin! Valåret 2014 Nyheter Aftonbladet

Almost all of the people who say that they want the monarchy abolished, want that because they think that the people of Sweden deserve the Head of State whom they have personally chosen at an election, and not a person who has inherited his/her position. These people don't say anything about that the king has married miss Sommerlath or the crown princess mr Westling. Some of these people have even said that Victoria could be a great president, she should run for the job if Sweden would become a republic.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

In addition, an abolition of the monarchy needs a change of the Constitution. To amend or to make a revision of the Constitution, the Swedish Parliament needs to approve the changes twice in two successive terms, with a general election having been held in between.

This means that it is a very unsecure outcome for politicians since a Government which proposes such a change has to offer its resignation and announce new elections (after the Riksdag has approved the Bill in a first session). Then the Swedes have their say in the elections and a new Riksdag has to read the same Bill in a second session. This means that the abolition of the monarchy is not that easy at all.

 

[Lee-Z]

Imo this says it all:

- One thing is to be against the royal family when you fill in a questionnaire, another thing is to push the issue when you find yourself in the position of power.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

The question is if long term there will be members of the royal family who want to lead such a life, with enormous priviledges but very limited choices.

 

[Blog Real]

Always monarchy. The monarchy will continue in Sweden.
The Republic has nothing to offer to Sweden.

 

[xenobia]

I think that Victoria might be queen one day, but I highly doubt that Estelle will take over the throne after her. The support for our monarchy has declined over the last couple of years. The king isn't that popular either, but Victoria and Daniel has a quite large public support.

Monarcy isn't a big political question, but it might become one in the near future. For those who support monarchy, let's hope that we have Queen Victoria at that point in time.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It brings me again to my pet topic. There is an intrinsic erosion of what still "royal" is amongst Europe's "royal" families. With the marriages to Ms Sommerlath, Ms Craig, Mr Westling, Mr O'Neill and now Ms Hellqvist the core notion of what differs these people from the common Swede is rapidly disappearing.

Monarchy is no rational concept. Any rational thinking person will opt for a democratically elected head of state to represent a modern and democratic state. However, as long as such a royal family embodies the glorious history of Sweden, represents the best what Sweden can offer, is a living link to the past and is truly royal in behaviour, dignity, appearance and descent, people are still willing to maintain and enjoy the fairytale.

But when a gym dude from Örebrö or a contestant from Paradise Hotel (a reality show) suddenly can become Royal Highnesses and Prince (Princess) of Sweden, all distance, all decorum, all what differs "them" from "us" has gone. The more the "commonization" of the monarchy advances, it becomes the best plea for a republic. After all: "When we want to have a commoner inside the palace, whe can elect him/herself, thank you."

This counts for all European monarchies, by the way.

 

[Marty91charmed]

that is soo true!

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

The Monarchy in Sweden is going to survive as long as it has popular support. There have been a majority in the Parliament to remove the monarchy for several years, but it's not going to happen. People are going to require a referendum, and we know who is going to win.

A constitutional monarchy is much better than a republic, in a constitutional monarchy we has a head of state who unites most of the people, while having a parliamentary system and an elected government. It works very well in the UK, Japan, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Sweden, there have been some problems in Belgium and Spain, but it had not been better with a President.

 

[Lady Nimue]

But when a gym dude from Örebrö or a contestant from Paradise Hotel (a reality show) suddenly can become Royal Highnesses and Prince (Princess) of Sweden, all distance, all decorum, all what differs "them" from "us" has gone. The more the "commonization" of the monarchy advances, it becomes the best plea for a republic. After all: "When we want to have a commoner inside the palace, we can elect him/her, thank you."

Excellent point!

Not intending to open the can of worms, but just to say, I do think a boundary has been crossed with Sofia Helqvist. Just reverse the situation - have Victoria marrying a man with Sofia's background (or even Madeleine marrying such a man), it never would have flown. Chris was wise refusing HRH. Sofia would be wise to do the same, but we all know she won't, though we could take bets. She might surprise us all.

Mind you, I wish the couple well. I am going to enjoy the wedding. I look forward to seeing their first baby. I think Carl Philip deserves to marry who he wants. Being royal should not be slavery. He deserves to live the life he wants and be happy and content on his terms. (I am also certain that Sofia is a charming person. I suspect she is pleasant to know and be around). However, even an elected head of state would have to undergo the approval of the public. People are sensitive about how public monies are spent. It's all a whole.

Maybe the SRF should take a lesson from the Norwegians who only have the monarch and heir be HRH. This leaves the rest to be free to live as commoners and make normal life choices without 'dynastic' or PR concerns.

 

[Al_bina]

It brings me again to my pet topic. There is an intrinsic erosion of what still "royal" is amongst Europe's "royal" families. With the marriages to Ms Sommerlath, Ms Craig, Mr Westling, Mr O'Neill and now Ms Hellqvist the core notion of what differs these people from the common Swede is rapidly disappearing.

Monarchy is no rational concept. Any rational thinking person will opt for a democratically elected head of state to represent a modern and democratic state. However, as long as such a royal family embodies the glorious history of Sweden, represents the best what Sweden can offer, is a living link to the past and is truly royal in behaviour, dignity, appearance and descent, people are still willing to maintain and enjoy the fairytale.

But when a gym dude from Örebrö or a contestant from Paradise Hotel (a reality show) suddenly can become Royal Highnesses and Prince (Princess) of Sweden, all distance, all decorum, all what differs "them" from "us" has gone. The more the "commonization" of the monarchy advances, it becomes the best plea for a republic. After all: "When we want to have a commoner inside the palace, when can elect him/herself, thank you."

This counts for all European monarchies, by the way.

You are very accurate describing the Cinderellisation of royal families.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I really do wish all the members of the Swedish royal family the best. However I think they have to stick to the rules of the game. We do. We say "Royal Highness", "Your Majesty", we bow and curtsey to them, we pay the huge bills. No one asked us, it is just there.

LadyFinn stated that some people in Sweden oppose the monarchy on itself, not because Victoria married Daniel. That is true. But as I said, the monarchy is no rational concept. It very much depends on irrational feelings as "it is worth having it", "we have a soft spot for these people", "it is a strange but interesting phenomenon", "they embody our nation's history". But Estelle already has three of the four grandparents and six of the eight great-grandparents without any royal or noble descent. The logical question then is why we have to treat her as something special.

Of course blue-blood is no guarantee for success but seeing that lady whom served you a latte macchiato in a bar in Kristiansand (Mette Marit) or that lady you saw presenting the news on your television (Letizia), or the guy who told you how to train your abs (Daniel) as royal has made many people realize it is all a vaudeville. Slowly the quarter or the dime falls down: hey wait a minute... you are not royal at all... You play you are royal.

This is by far not the only threat to monarchies but there is a major difference: all other threats come from the outside, this threat is very fundamental and comes from inside the monarchies itself. I really hope that Estelle, Ingrid Alexandra, Elisabeth, Catharina-Amalia, Christian, Leonor and George will turn back the tide and bring some "exclusivity" back into the royal families. My well-meant advice.

 

[Blog Real]

It brings me again to my pet topic. There is an intrinsic erosion of what still "royal" is amongst Europe's "royal" families. With the marriages to Ms Sommerlath, Ms Craig, Mr Westling, Mr O'Neill and now Ms Hellqvist the core notion of what differs these people from the common Swede is rapidly disappearing.

Monarchy is no rational concept. Any rational thinking person will opt for a democratically elected head of state to represent a modern and democratic state. However, as long as such a royal family embodies the glorious history of Sweden, represents the best what Sweden can offer, is a living link to the past and is truly royal in behaviour, dignity, appearance and descent, people are still willing to maintain and enjoy the fairytale.

But when a gym dude from Örebrö or a contestant from Paradise Hotel (a reality show) suddenly can become Royal Highnesses and Prince (Princess) of Sweden, all distance, all decorum, all what differs "them" from "us" has gone. The more the "commonization" of the monarchy advances, it becomes the best plea for a republic. After all: "When we want to have a commoner inside the palace, whe can elect him/herself, thank you."

This counts for all European monarchies, by the way.

Those are personal choices of the Princes. The monarchy is part of the history of Sweden. Is part of its identity and never can end.
The Republic is not better, is more open to corruption and does not bring anything good.

 

[Mbruno]

I really do wish all the members of the Swedish royal family the best. However I think they have to stick to the rules of the game. We do. We say "Royal Highness", "Your Majesty", we bow and curtsey to them, we pay the huge bills. No one asked us, it is just there.

LadyFinn stated that some people in Sweden oppose the monarchy on itself, not because Victoria married Daniel. That is true. But as I said, the monarchy is no rational concept. It very much depends on irrational feelings as "it is worth having it", "we have a soft spot for these people", "it is a strange but interesting phenomenon", "they embody our nation's history". But Estelle already has three of the four grandparents and six of the eight great-grandparents without any royal or noble descent. The logical question then is why we have to treat her as something special.

Of course blue-blood is no guarantee for success but seeing that lady whom served you a latte macchiato in a bar in Kristiansand (Mette Marit) or that lady you saw presenting the news on your television (Letizia), or the guy who told you how to train your abs (Daniel) as royal has made many people realize it is all a vaudeville. Slowly the quarter or the dime falls down: hey wait a minute... you are not royal at all... You play you are royal.

This is by far not the only threat to monarchies but there is a major difference: all other threats come from the outside, this threat is very fundamental and comes from inside the monarchies itself. I really hope that Estelle, Ingrid Alexandra, Elisabeth, Catharina-Amalia, Christian, Leonor and George will turn back the tide and bring some "exclusivity" back into the royal families. My well-meant advice.

In 1975, the Swedish King gave up all his formal executive and legislative powers and, unlike his other European counterparts, is no longer involved in appointing ministers, issuing decrees, or sanctioning laws. His role is now purely ceremonial (hosting state dinners, giving out medals,etc.), although the King still holds Councils of State with the cabinet (solely to be "informed" about government policy) and attends special state ceremonies such as the opening of Parliament or the swearing-in of a new government. The only state officials who are still formally appointed by the King are Sweden's ambassadors, as international law requires that their diplomatic credentials be issued by the Head of State.

At the time the new Swedish constitution came into force, it was assumed that this "downsizing" of the King's role would be an alternative to outright republicanism and would ensure the survival of the monarchy for many generations to come. In hindsight though, by making the King largely irrelevant without any apparent collapse of "peace, order, and good government", I'm afraid the Swedish government has actually helped to prove the point raised by republicans that the monarch is not really necessary as a non-partisan arbiter to ensure the stability of state institutions and, therefore, the case for keeping an unelected, hereditary and permanent Head of State is not that strong after all.

Personally, I doubt there is any statistical evidence (polls, etc.) showing that the popularity of the Swedish royal family or other European royal houses has declined with recent marriages between royals and commoners. In fact, the contrary is probably more likely. The downsizing of the monarchy since 1975, of which "unequal marriages" are only a small part, has been negative though IMHO to the Swedish crown. In fact, I miss the King's speeches from the Silver Throne and other traditional royal ceremonies that have been abandoned with the pretense of "modernizing" the Swedish monarchy.
.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

There is really not that much difference between the King of Sweden, the King of the Netherlands, the Queen of the United Kingdom, etc. when it comes to executive political powers. They exist on paper. On paper. In reality they are all completely coccooned by the ministerial responsibility: "The King is inviolable, the ministers are responsible".

Any royal head of state who tries to go against the will of the Government or Parliament faces HUGE problems. King Baudouin had to step down for a day because what he did not want (the Abortion Act) was ratified anyway, with the schizophrenic situation that the ratified Act was then maintained in the very name of His Majesty The King. The King's cousin, Grand Duke Henri of Luxembourg, who uttered objections agains the Euthanasia Act, was deprived of parts of his royal prerogatives in a way that it makes clear that his signature is automatic and he/she has no freedom of decision. The Grand Duke no longer needs to sanction laws for them to take effect.

On paper both King Baudouin and Grand Duke Henri were so much more "powerful" than King Carl XVI Gustaf but that is "on paper". As I said: the ministers are responsible. What the ministers do want or do not want, that will happen. So ALL European monarchies with exception of Liechtenstein, Monaco and the Vatican have a puppet as a figurehead.

This is accepted because of the extraordinary position these families have in their society, in the history of their country, and the way they embody the best of their country. But "extraordinary" also means, the more ordinary one becomes, the lesser "extraordinary" it will be. It is as simple as that. When Ingrid Alexandra marries a Mr Hansen from Tromsø and when Catharina-Amalia marries her field hockey mate from Rotterdam, then the "distance" and what makes them "royal" completely disappears. Any poster who denies this is just sticking the head in the sand and ignoring the intrinsic erosion of what it once meant to be "royal". Luckily we are all free to voice our opinions on a well-argumented and polite manner.

 

[COUNTESS]

What made them "Royal" was a made up farce. They weren't better, nicer or smarter. They were the decendants of a man with a big sword. They created a mystique. Today, you couldn't sell that, as people are educated and can read and are not afraid of the guy with the big sword.

 

[casualfan]

What made them "Royal" was a made up farce. They weren't better, nicer or smarter. They were the decendants of a man with a big sword. They created a mystique. Today, you couldn't sell that, as people are educated and can read and are not afraid of the guy with the big sword.

To a great extent this is true, so that the argument just doesn't hold that royalty has to be different or elevated from the common folk.

In other words, I think the modernization of monarchies continues to build on the ceremonial - but also cultural, linguistic and economic - role of the royal houses. This very well may require down sizing the royal houses (as in Spain or Norway) and making the lifestyles of the royals more modest.

 

[COUNTESS]

To a great extent this is true, so that the argument just doesn't hold that royalty has to be different or elevated from the common folk.

In other words, I think the modernization of monarchies continues to build on the ceremonial - but also cultural, linguistic and economic - role of the royal houses. This very well may require down sizing the royal houses (as in Spain or Norway) and making the lifestyles of the royals more modest.

You are quite correct. It is exactly what has to happen. Very astute.