Time for a republic

A system with an unelected head of state is not a full democracy. Although many of the royals powers have been transferred to the government the head of state is an important job and that person should be voted in by the public and not entitled to it by birthright. Inequality is rightly unacceptable regarding sexism, racism and any other matters yet the royalists have no problem with one family inheriting their positions and excluding every other member of the population. To republicans like myself this lack of equality is disgraceful especially for a modern developed country in the 21st century. 

A typical royalist response to this inherited position is to criticise our politicians. They seem to be unaware of the democratic system of voting for people. If these politicians do not perform their jobs to an adequate standard then don't vote for them in the next election. If they are found to be corrupt they can be removed or impeached. This can't be done with the royals as they are above the law. Monarchists also mention that royals are impartial. This seems to be wrong as Prince Charles has allegedly been found out to have tried lobbying politicians. 

There is also hardly any negative news reports on television about the royals with the BBC and ITV being particularly pro royal. I'm sure the multi million pound budgeted Buckingham Palace press office work very hard to keep the royals in a positive light and assert pressure to stamp out negative stories as quickly as possible. The recent story regarding Prince Andrew springs to mind. Guilty or innocent, if that had been a 'celebrity' that story would have been every where for weeks. 

I've also seen the poll suggesting that 20% of people are republicans and 80% are royalists. I feel that is inaccurate. In my opinion the country is divided into 3 types of People, republicans like myself and monarchists some of whom are the sycophants that line the streets whenever a royal event happens. The 3rd group are people that don't particularly care either way. They are either to busy dealing with life's problems like putting food on the table or feel they can't do anything about the situation and it doesn't effect their lives so they are happy with the status quo but they are included in the 80%.

As mentioned the Buckingham Palace press office does an effective job in keeping people in line. The typical "they are good for tourism" story is a good example of their work. As mentioned by someone already That The Palace of Versailles in France has more visitors than Buckingham Palace each year. Seeing as the French got rid of their monarchy over 200 years ago it doesn't seem to have affected their tourist trade to badly. 

I also don't believe that most of the royals are good representatives and diplomats for our country and find the lack of transparancies in their tax affairs worrying. There should be an open discussion with all of the true facts about how much the monarchy really cost the tax payers. That might be all that is needed to swing the people who are sitting on the fence to the republican side Of the argument. 

edited on Apr 15, 2015 by David Taylor

Ruobing Wang Apr 5, 2015

Hello, Dear Contributors


Welcome to the refining stage! In the next 2 weeks, we are looking forward to working with you, in order to refine selected ideas and produce concise final propositions based on these ideas. 

For this purpose, Head of State facilitators would like to remind you of the new features available to every contributor at this stage. Now, you can add, amend or withdraw votes already cast. This would be very important for us to see which ideas truly reflected your preferences, and to ensure that your preferences are represented fairly. 

Also, in the selected ideas, many overlap with others. Please use your judgment when choosing and voting on the ideas that are truly representative of your views.




Head of State Team