Where Does Everyone See The Monarchy in 50 to 100 Years?

[caterpillarandcat]

British? Most likley extinct. Let's hope not..

 

[Furienna]

Oh, I don't think so. I rather think the monarchies, which are still left today, are here to stay.

 

[HRH Kimetha]

I don't think the monarchy will survive as Britain, as we know it today or knew 20 years ago, will be a different country in 20 years, much less 50 to 100 years for reasons that are obvious, but is restricted to say on this forum as they are political reasons.

 

[Royal Fan]

As long as the Monarch does a Decent Job and theres a responsible Government All will be well.

 

[Prince of Chota]

Monarchy is an anachronistic concept that has very little time left.They are only human beings...

You would think, wouldn't you? But just remember the public mourning when Diana, Princess of Wales died. And how much people really do respect the queen and would stand up for her. You wouldn't exactly get away with cursing her name in front of me. In many countries, the former royal families and nobilities are still acknowledged. In some, being from one of these families is the ticket into government. Public education may have eliminated the power of the educated few, but not diminished the esteem that people place in the traditional social systems. And it has grown increasingly apparent in recent years how much coutries without monarchies replace that system with celebrities--varitable celebriarchy. I mean, does anyone actually think that the public cares about Tom and Katie's baby because she will grow up to be a superior actress? Hardly. You may say that times are changing, but if you bother at all to look back at history, you would see how little anything has changed.

 

[Prince of Chota]

I don't think the monarchy will survive as Britain, as we know it today or knew 20 years ago, will be a different country in 20 years, much less 50 to 100 years for reasons that are obvious, but is restricted to say on this forum as they are political reasons.

I can't imagine a British political identity sans monarchy. And I doubt I'm the only one.

 

[Prince of Chota]

Sometimes I think the monarch should have more direct powers in England. I've always believed that people who are raised to rule should have at least some voice. However, should the monarchy cease to exist in the UK, I only hope that the royal family should move to another of the countries that the sovereign governs and takes on the role there. I might cite the example of the Portuguese Royal family fleeing Napoleon to Brasil--and staying for quite some time.

 

[Elspeth]

I don't think the monarchy will survive as Britain, as we know it today or knew 20 years ago, will be a different country in 20 years, much less 50 to 100 years for reasons that are obvious, but is restricted to say on this forum as they are political reasons.

If you will check the rules, you'll see that political issues which directly relate to monarchy are perfectly legitimate topics of discussion. We just want to avoid having threads descend into politically motivated arguments.

 

[Royal Fan]

it will last as long as the Monarch Retains some Respect

 

[KittyAtlanta]

Oh, how I dislike saying this, but I am in agreement with Ygrain. This began when the monarchy became a Constitutional Monarchy. I believe when William ascends the throne, the institution will begin to wain, but not be dissolved. It will take a few generations, but it will happen.

As for political identity, that is the realm of the citizens (they're not subjects any more, are they), which will be marked by how they vote.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Yes, I agree. There's something about monarchy that's deeply ingrained in a nation's psyche IMO. And I think that although there are republicans in all monarchies, it takes a lot of social upheaval or even revolution to depose one.

it will last as long as the Monarch Retains some Respect

 

[jemagre]

Oh, how I dislike saying this, but I am in agreement with Ygrain. This began when the monarchy became a Constitutional Monarchy. I believe when William ascends the throne, the institution will begin to wain, but not be dissolved. It will take a few generations, but it will happen.

As for political identity, that is the realm of the citizens (they're not subjects any more, are they), which will be marked by how they vote.

I think the institution is waning right now.The respect that people feel for them is draining all the time. For example: If people are saying I don't want Charles I want William then they don't want a monarchy they want a modified democracy. After all the whole point of a monarchy is to take whoever is next in line. You can't vote out one person in favor of another unless you get rid of the whole organization in favor of a democracy.

I believe that they are still considered subjects but I believe they consider themselves citizens.

 

[PrincessMolly]

I think the institution is waning right now.The respect that people feel for them is draining all the time. For example: If people are saying I don't want Charles I want William then they don't want a monarchy they want a modified democracy. After all the whole point of a monarchy is to take whoever is next in line. You can't vote out one person in favor of another unless you get rid of the whole organization in favor of a democracy.

I believe that they are still considered subjects but I believe they consider themselves citizens.

There have been monarchies in the past, where the eldest child was not automaticaly ruler, that when the ruler died, a counsel decided who would take the title.

 

[jemagre]

There have been monarchies in the past, where the eldest child was not automaticaly ruler, that when the ruler died, a counsel decided who would take the title.

That is a weird monarchy. Thinks though for the different suggestion. I suppose that could be an idea. Then again why not go for a republic where you have a prime minister and then a president?

I do acknowledge though that in this regard I tend to be more black/white. Either you have monarchy and accepts who comes next or you don't. I know that the world doesn't work like that so a modified solution could be the answer.

 

[nascarlucy]

I don't think that the monarchy will totally disappear. I think what you will see is people who have royal blood becoming more and more like your average person. They will still have their titles but will have jobs or will have more in common with the average folk. They will not of course have the power or influence that they did (I don't see any monarchy becoming stronger).

One thing I can't understand and of course this is just me. If I was born with a royal title or entitled to one, I would have it in my name. Some royals don't do this but if you're born with it or entitled to it, why not?

If I had documentation to prove that my ancestry came from a baron, Earl or Lord I would go by the title Baroness Lucy..... or Lady Lucy or whatever. If I'm legally entitled to this title or could prove this, why not. People roll their eyes when I say this as I imagine people reading this will be rolling their eyes as well.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

Monarchies are always producing more offspring than can remain officially involved, hence rules of male primogeniture and the fact that women typically can't give their titles to their husbands (not all monarchies/hereditary nobility worked that way, but most eventually do).

So, I doubt that some of Queen Elizabeth's first cousins' descendants will be on anyone's radar as royalty, they will not have titles, they will be ordinary people with aristocratic ancestry.

But, the direct line from Queen Elizabeth to Prince Charles to Prince William will still be in place. Prince Harry will probably be a distant memory, but William and Catherine's offspring will continue on (unless they don't have any, in which case Prince Harry and his offspring will definitely become important).

In other words, it will be much the way it is now.