Should Britain have a monarchy?

[milestogo]

87 votes, 3 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	It is not for Americans to decide.
	66 (76%)
	Its just a harmless tradition.
	1 (1%)
	Camilla is a skank.
	1 (1%)
	Yes, because some people are born better than others.
	0 (0%)
	Its the 21st century and nobody needs a monarchy.
	15 (17%)
	Charles is so annoying.
	0 (0%)
	Gives the Brits something to cheer about.
	0 (0%)
	Yes, but only if there's a vote.
	1 (1%)
	Harry should be king.
	2 (2%)
	OTHER
	1 (1%)
	3 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[OAITW r.2.0]

1. Other

That's for the Brits to decide.

Ub edit - Opps....I see my choice was #1,,,,never mind.

[FalloutShelter]

2. The monarchy brings in

Millions in tourist dollars.
The monarchy and the historical sites connected to the monarchy is the main reason for tourists to visit GB.
Also… not up to us.

[Effete Snob]

4. How much you think this couple gets paid?

People spend a lot to visit their kingdom too. Probably more than the UK one brings in, and at a much lower cost.

[TexasDem69]

18. That couple

Isn’t getting paid solely from tax dollars

[Doc Sportello]

10. That's a fallacy. Visitors come for the sites not the monarchy

Versailles brings in far more tourist dollars than Buckingham Palace. And, as pointed out here, there is no evidence the monarchy is a net money maker for the government.
https://evolvepolitics.com/there-is-literally-no-evidence-that-the-monarchy-makes-any-profit-for-uk-taxpayers-whatsoever/

[DenaliDemocrat]

23. And if the monarchy dissolved

It would still ring in $$$ from tourist

[Effete Snob]

39. Probably even more

Since the various sites would be open for tours.

As noted above, Versailles is not wanting for visitors. I’ve been there a couple of times, and they keep improving and restoring more stuff.

I’ve seen Buckingham Palace through a fence on the outside. Same with Kensington. You can see part of the castle at Windsor, provided the royals AREN’T around.

[Withywindle]

49. Have any tourists really cared since QEII died?

Was she even that big a draw? Most of my friends who went there were mostly interested in historic sites that way predate even her, like the Tower of London and the Shambles in York and all sorts of crumbling old castles and regular-people houses going back to Celtic and Saxon times, and literary sites like Dartmoor (Hound of the Baskervilles) and Yorkshire moors (Brontes), and of course London and Liverpool and Manchester are FULL of sites for people interested in British music from the Beatles to punk to goth to Britpop to....

honestly House of Windsor is one of the LEAST interesting aspects of the British Isles.

[Effete Snob]

3. We have enough to worry about in this country

[sarisataka]

8. You missed a big one

[phylny]

19. You missed my favorite:

|

[Ilsa]

43. Is that Abe Froman, the sausage king of Chicago?

[marble falls]

5. Not our bidness either way. Our interference in other's governance and culture has not been ...

... very successful or welcomed.

[Scrivener7]

6. Not my problem. But lordy, there's something very punchable about both

of those faces in that photo.

[kimbutgar]

7. Younger Britons are over the monarchy while the older ones still like it !

I was in LA last month and while on a tour van talked to two British women in their twenties and I asked them about King Charles they both said ewww and said they didn’t like him. At the airport I talked to two British guys in their 50-60’s the same question and they were excited about King Charles.

[no_hypocrisy]

9. What Dennis said . . . . .

[niyad]

59. Love that scene!

[Doc Sportello]

11. If it's none of our business, then isn't that also true for Russia?

And Turkey, Saudi Arabia, China, etc. And no, it isn't a matter of degree. Either it's ok to give an opinion on other governments or it's not.

[meadowlander]

42. Having a king isn't a human rights violation.

[Maeve]

12. On general principle I object to monarchies/caste systems

The idea that some people deserve more rights by accident of birth is abhorrent. That it happens in all societies, is ....human. At least, it is at this point in our evolution. More social equality is in keeping with both ideals of social justice (is the head of a business REALLY worth 100 times a worker?) and the understanding I have of the teachings of Jesus.
That said, their royal hinnies can go sit on a tack for all I care.

[Celerity]

13. as a citizen (US, UK, Sweden) I say my 2 monarchies need to be consigned to the dustbin of history

I have no issues with my fellow Americans saying this as well, even if they are not also citizens of a nation under a monarchy, as the US fought a war to escape the tyranny of the crown.

Rule and/or political power of any kind via blood-right is abhorrent to every fibre of my being.

[milestogo]

16. Thank you.

My maternal grandmother was from Ljusne, Gävleborg, Sweden.

[Celerity]

20. Ljusne's a historical stronghold for the left parties, especially my party, the Social Democrats (S)

Unfortunately, the far right nationalist Sweden Democrats (SD) have made massive gains there the last three Riksdag (our parliament) elections.

In 2022, for the first time in over 100 years, the Social Dems failed to get 50% of the total vote there, and SD exploded to over 30%.




2022

[milestogo]

22. That's disappointing.

Her husband, my grandfather, was from Fredericia, Vejle, Denmark. I hope to travel to both countries someday.

[Celerity]

28. Ljusne is only around 240 km north of Stockholm, so easy to get to

[milestogo]

57. Wow, gorgeous pictures.

I can't wait to visit!

[Yavin4]

14. Only if it's a member of the Targaryen family. n/t

[In It to Win It]

15. None of my business. Our judicial monarchy needs to be dealt with.

[JCMach1]

17. To be fair they tried it once and Cromwell was a bit of a disaster

[Celerity]

21. Yes, but the 1650's are hardly a fair comparison to the modern UK.

[Effete Snob]

56. I dunno, how was the food?

[Earth-shine]

24. They look so happy!

[Withywindle]

51. LOL

don't they just?

[hunter]

25. Not my circus, not my monkeys.

.

[nolabear]

44. LOL--That's exactly what I was going to say.

[Autumn]

26. None of my business.

[Irish_Dem]

27. Americans murder their children as they sit in school.

We have no right to tell any other country what to do.

We have lost our moral high ground.

[Polybius]

29. Of course

[Shellback Squid]

30. Robb is a Dingbat

[Hekate]

38. You tell 'em

[nolabear]

45. ...

[Liberal In Texas]

31. Better them than us. n/t

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

32. Is it any of our business? Thought not, carry on...

[LostOne4Ever]

33. The three arrows of anti-authoritarianism

No to Fascism.

No to Stalinism.

AND NO TO MONARCHS AND DICTATORS!!!

I don’t care if all they are is overpaid ambassadors, all royalty must be ended.

[Raine]

34. Their country, their choice 🇬🇧

if they don't want a monarchy they're the ones who can end it.

[MrsCoffee]

35. Skank? Seriously?

So sick of the sexist misogynistic shit here.

Do better.

[leftstreet]

37. +1

Have to agree. It's still surprising to me see it on DU

[Sky Jewels]

46. Yeah, I agree.

I’m no Camilla fan (mainly because it seems she’s made racist remarks), but this is misogynistic double-standard crap.

[MattBaggins]

48. OP should remove that if possible

And apologize

Just a moment of reflection before posting can help prevent misogynistic crap

[Violet_Crumble]

55. Someone called her a slut in another thread...

Totally not acceptable.

[MrsCoffee]

63. FFS.

Bro culture at it's finest.

[sarisataka]

69. Don't worry,

Someone will come along to explain it isn't misogynistic because if you read all possible definitions, one is not female specific.

[Sky Jewels]

70. Yeah. It's just a coincidence that Charles, who also committed adultery,

isn't characterized as such.

[sarisataka]

71. To quote Mel Brooks-

"It's good to be King"

[LiberalFighter]

36. Not with those two.

[Hekate]

40. How is this any of our business?The UK has been a reliable ally of ours for generations. They choose

…to maintain this form of government, which is solidly constitutional. The Royals have businesses of their own, which earns them money — I neither know nor care what the details are.

As for Chaz and Camilla, they have been in love since before Diana was born. They were forbidden to marry by some arcane set of rules. After a considerable period of time Charles was finally pressured into marrying someone, anyone, who fit the bill.

Diana’s older sister said absolutely not. And there was the beautiful, young, and above all naive Diana, who produced an heir and a spare, grew up, realized there was no fairytale marriage, and left. Just as her “spare” son has chosen to do.

Meanwhile, whatever else one may think of the adulterous love of Chaz and Camilla, they apparently have remained attached to each other for 50 years. No fairytales involved.

[Sky Jewels]

41. If it were up to me (Hah!)...

I’d start systemically scaling the monarchy down. Like, sell off a property every few years, chop several million pounds off the budget every couple years, reduce staff, eliminate almost all the expensive pageantry, etc. Don’t do it drastically, but start the process so people have time to get used to it. Then eventually William and Kate could be monarchs in the Scandinavian style … much more low key.

[niyad]

47. That is a picture of two very unhappy people. Like they cannot even stand

looking at each other. (The old adage, "Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it," comes to mind.)

[mnhtnbb]

53. Charles must be wondering

if he'll have to do it--be King--for another 20 years. He looks like he's had enough already.

[muriel_volestrangler]

67. It appears to be from the 2016 State Opening of Parliament - a stunningly boring event

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22450163

at which neither even got to read out the government's speech - they just had to sit there in silence and listen to Elizabeth read it out. So, yeah, they're not gazing lovingly at each other. They're not meant to be. Their job, that day, was to look serious.

[niyad]

73. That does not appear to be the same dress. Much more lace in the one in the link.

[muriel_volestrangler]

75. You're right - my link was to the 2013 Opening. The one in the OP is from 2016

See https://www.alamy.com/the-duchess-of-cornwall-during-the-state-opening-of-parliament-in-the-house-of-lords-at-the-palace-of-westminster-in-london-image372070982.html (dated 18 May 2016).

Even less surprising they don't look like they're enjoying themselves. It's a repeat.

[Withywindle]

50. Why is his face so red in this photo?

If I were in the Top 20 of richest people on the planet, I would pay for color-correcting makeup, or at least a photoshop job to make me look a little less like a sunburned boiled lobster in my obviously uncomfortable D&D garb.

[eShirl]

52. Nobody needs a monarchy AND it's not for Americans to decide.

[Dorian Gray]

54. Monarchy is dumb

but as an american, this isn't my fight.

I certainly won't be watching the coronation

[tavernier]

58. Sure, why not?

Way more interesting than following the Kardashians. At least the monarchy is rich in history and tradition. Good old Henry VIII, a sociopathic serial killer who changed the entire religion of the country because he wanted to marry his girlfriend, who he later had beheaded. His daughter Elizabeth, just as murderous and wacky, and the inventor of white pancake makeup. And don’t forget King Richard who had his young nephews murdered and buried under the steps of the Tower of London, just so he could wear that coveted crown.

Other countries have equally interesting royal histories but the stories aren’t followed as much once the monarchies end. So I say, let them reign. How much harm could they possibly cause with that gene pool?

[ecstatic]

60. It's their business, I don't care. Not interested...

Well, that's not entirely true. I've been telling myself I would watch the crown on Netflix but just haven't gotten around to it. One of these days.

[Johonny]

61. Yes, but only if it's Keith Richards.

[milestogo]

62. ...

[shrike3]

66. I could go for that.

[mvd]

64. A few of these apply IMO

It is outdated, but harmless, and provides a diversion for many people. I don’t mind it but let the British decide.

[LeftinOH]

65. There are times when a non-political head of state is not a bad thing..

Meaning: In the USA, the President is both head of government *and* head of state. From January 6th to January 20th, 2001 we essentially had no head of state; Trump had abandoned any pretense of leadership. Almost exactly 40 years earlier Spain's head of state, King Juan Carlos, headed off an attempted coup and saved their democracy.

[inthewind21]

68. Should the US

Have any say in what Brittan does?

[VGNonly]

72. "Man will never be free

until the last king is strangled by the entrails of the last priest"

Denis Diderot

[Niagara]

74. I'm more concerned that any DU member believes that it's acceptable to

refer to any woman as the derogatory term "skank".



Like her or hate her, Camilla was Charles first and apparently only true love. They go way back before she wed Andrew and he wed Princess Diana. I wish that Charles had stayed true to Princess Diana, but he didn't.


I also wish that the beautiful and humane Princess Diana was still with us and administrating her humanitarian efforts, but I can't change what I can't change.


Disclaimer: I'm not going to go back and forth with anyone here that thinks it's acceptable to reference any woman with a derogatory and misogynistic term. I've said my piece adequately.