Abolish The British Monarchy?

Chet said:
Some have suggested it including the new Prime Minister when she was 19. Your thoughts?
Click to expand...


Well frankly, since I'm American ... does my opinion even matter ?

But , from my opinion stash;

I think it's all a bunch of bull, I see no reason for it/them ... and I cannot even fathom what it costs the Brits to keep it going ?

LOL ! I would LUV to see those two snot-nosed kids [the boy's] flipping burgers somewhere ....... hopefully over there.

Like I noted in an earlier post ... We fought a war to get away from that sort of rule. As such what they do @ home means nothing too me.
 
hollydolly said:
Nope... and the new Prime Minister was just a kid when she said that... .. I do think the Monarchy should continue, but without all the extended hangers on. King Charles intention is to slim it right down to a handful of working royals, and remove the rest from the Paylist
Click to expand...


The more i hear lately [last few days] the more I am becoming of fan of his [Charles] It seems too me that he was [out-shined] by his mother, his ex-wife , and his two useless kids.
 
Nathan said:
Not my call, I only have 53% Commonwealth ancestry. I think that the American presidency should be abolished, and the entire administrative -legislative branches be replaced with a parliamentary system.
Click to expand...
I live in a parliamentary system and it sucks. Zero checks and balances on the government. I think a lot of folks in the USA recognize that the constitutional system as originally written and designed has been subverted both by an abnegation of responsibility by the legislative branch and aggrandizement of the executive branch to take advantage of it. I think at the moment the USA is being run by a not-so-secret cabal of special interests and their political enablers in both political parties. They don't care if they destroy the republic and ruin the lives of millions doing so. They figure they'll do just fine after the fall. I could name names.

PS: For a long time I thought Elizabeth was just trying to outlive Victoria. Having done so I next thought she was trying to outlive her son, hoping all the while the rule of succession could be altered to grant the throne directly to William and Kate. Despite his previous years as an environmental gadfly, I think Charles will settle for being a well-paid caretaker for a few years before passing the crown on to William.

PPS: To tickle your funny bone from time to time remember that Meghan Markle is only 2 heartbeats away from becoming the official Royal Consort.
 
Last edited:
Well the only real reason I would scrap the present system in the U.S. is to get rid of the presidency, which has become a "commodity", a target for monied special interests to gain control of. A PM would have similar functions as a president, but being chosen by the members of a parliament, which would through more public scrutiny on the MPs, which in a perfect world would extract more accountability.
As we've seen previously, a president can wreck havoc on countless aspects of the government with Executive Orders, sort of like a king in medieval times. Looking for accountability here.
 
When Australia finally becomes a republic it is very unlikely that it will be a presidential system. The parliamentary system is not perfect and it is vulnerable to rorting, porkbarrelling and corruption but in the end it is what we are familiar with and even prime ministers can be booted out of office by their own electorates.

Legislation that will come before parliament in this session is a long overdue federal independent commission against corruption. The states already have their own versions and they are powerful tools to use on venal politicians and public officials.
 
Last edited:
Charles and his WEF "green agenda" scares me. I foresee bankrupt farmers and government controlled food and a suffering populace. He's not the most ethical man either, he left his princess and sons for a third party. Divorce used to be taboo for royals, I think. In any case, I'm American so this is for British people to decide not me, but I felt Queen Elizabeth had life experiences, the global depression of the 1930's and World War II, that helped make her the great queen she was. She had slightly more of a concept of what her subjects needed and wanted than the younger royals seem to. They're so out of touch they remind me of the Kardashians.
 
Last edited:
It costs the working citizens about $1.29 per year to support on part of the Monarchy. Tourism brings in a ton of dough for the UK and don't think for one moment it doesn't. There are other elements involved, but Holly would know more about them than I. I agree with her, slim it down, and get rid of those who don't contribute to its upkeep. There are a good many diplomatic endeavors these people carry out and that has to aid the running of the government in a big way. Especially among its Colonials.
 
amwassil said:
I live in a parliamentary system and it sucks. Zero checks and balances on the government. I think a lot of folks in the USA recognize that the constitutional system as originally written and designed has been subverted both by an abnegation of responsibility by the legislative branch and aggrandizement of the executive branch to take advantage of it. I think at the moment the USA is being run by a not-so-secret cabal of special interests and their political enablers in both political parties. They don't care if they destroy the republic and ruin the lives of millions doing so. They figure they'll do just fine after the fall. I could name names.

PS: For a long time I thought Elizabeth was just trying to outlive Victoria. Having done so I next thought she was trying to outlive her son, hoping all the while the rule of succession could be altered to grant the throne directly to William and Kate. Despite his previous years as an environmental gadfly, I think Charles will settle for being a well-paid caretaker for a few years before passing the crown on to William.

PPS: To tickle your funny bone from time to time remember that Meghan Markle is only 2 heartbeats away from becoming the official Royal Consort.
Click to expand...
No, actually she's not. After Charles III, it will be William then his children in order of birth (George, Charlotte, Louis) then Harry.

https://www.royal.uk/succession
 
I am British born half English, half Scots. I believe that King Charles will make a great King, he'll pare down the monarchy which in turn will change the way the firm operate. Over the past few days wherever we live in the world we can see how much the world loves the Queen, and we also see just how much they love King Charles. If he can only keep his political views to himself I think Great Britain has a winner.
 
Warrigal said:
When Australia finally becomes a republic it is very unlikely that it will be a presidential system. The parliamentary system is not perfect and it is vulnerable to rorting, porkbarrelling and corruption but in the end it is what we are familiar with and even prime ministers can be booted out of office by their own electorates.

Legislation that will come before parliament in this session is a long overdue federal independent commission against corruption. The states already have their own versions and they are powerful tools to use on venal politicians and public officials.
Click to expand...
"Rorting", now there's a two dollar word I'm not familiar with. šŸ˜…
 
amwassil said:
I live in a parliamentary system and it sucks. Zero checks and balances on the government. I think a lot of folks in the USA recognize that the constitutional system as originally written and designed has been subverted both by an abnegation of responsibility by the legislative branch and aggrandizement of the executive branch to take advantage of it. I think at the moment the USA is being run by a not-so-secret cabal of special interests and their political enablers in both political parties. They don't care if they destroy the republic and ruin the lives of millions doing so. They figure they'll do just fine after the fall. I could name names.

PS: For a long time I thought Elizabeth was just trying to outlive Victoria. Having done so I next thought she was trying to outlive her son, hoping all the while the rule of succession could be altered to grant the throne directly to William and Kate. Despite his previous years as an environmental gadfly, I think Charles will settle for being a well-paid caretaker for a few years before passing the crown on to William.

PPS: To tickle your funny bone from time to time remember that Meghan Markle is only 2 heartbeats away from becoming the official Royal Consort.
Click to expand...
Wow, a new member spewing conspiracy theories. Imagine that. The US run by a "secret cabal"? In the US, you would have been labeled Q-Anon. Please do name names.

PS: Welcome to the forum.
 
I have heard here and there that Canada looked at pulling out, but it would cost way too much as the country and the provinces are all wrapped up in it...

I also hope I do not sound ignorant... But what do the Royals do in these times of life... Really, with governments... Just confused about it all...
 
RobinWren said:
I am British born half English, half Scots. I believe that King Charles will make a great King, he'll pare down the monarchy which in turn will change the way the firm operate. Over the past few days wherever we live in the world we can see how much the world loves the Queen, and we also see just how much they love King Charles. If he can only keep his political views to himself I think Great Britain has a winner.
Click to expand...
Which half of you was born in Scotland ? :sneaky:
 
mike4lorie said:
I have heard here and there that Canada looked at pulling out, but it would cost way too much as the country and the provinces are all wrapped up in it...

I also hope I do not sound ignorant... But what do the Royals do in these times of life... Really, with governments... Just confused about it all...
Click to expand...
with all due respect.. look it up... :)
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top