Monachy: good or bad ?

[AmandaLeigh]

im doing research into the abolition of monarchies and whether that has had a positive or negative effect on that country ( woow i sound intelligent xD )

italy chucked their monachy in 1947 after ww2.... why ?

the queen and queen mother of the netherlands got thrown in jail in 1903 and then surrendered the thrown. Know anything about this ?

also what are peoples opinion about the queen being the head of the church of england? i personally think that the archbishiop of canturbry should be the head. after all he does more for the church than she does...

please reply....

 

[Flirty]

I know of a brilliant resource for things like this here

Dont know anything about Italy or the Netherlands, but someone will

My opinion on our monarchy here in the UK - Government has pretty much all the power they need. The monarch can still dissolve the Parliament I think, but cant the Government call a referendum on getting rid of the monarch (I remember reading something like that somewhere) ?

The Queen does some good for the country - check out how many foreign visitors visit the Palaces and are fascinated by the monarchy. I know I am on another forum where its mainly Americans and they love the idea of the Queen. The revenue from the tourists alone is good enough for me. However, I reckon that the Queen has spent long enough on the throne and its time for someone more "modern" and with the times to take her place - William being my choice. Educated and is going to serve his country (so what if he will have to salute his younger brother at Sandhurst?).

A monarch should be a leader for the country. While they bring in the cash, they should still be able to say "Sod this, Blair is doing the wrong thing. Time for a change I think" and Blair (or whoever) is out with an election called.

So: Queen good for cash/tourism. Would prefer someone who actually looks to be able to lead rather than sit there and look good for the tourists. Would love to see the Government pass some power back to the Monarch so that the Queen/King can "earn their keep".

 

[EternalVeritgo]

As far as I'm concerned, the Royal family is a tourist attraction.

 

[diggn4richez]

I sometimes feel sorry for them though, it's not like they really have a good choice in the matter is it? They can't really choose to live as normal people.

 

[KickaSue]

man im sure when i was at school we did our own reports

 

[NM]

aye. but its alot more educational and interestingto take into considerantion other peoples point of view to make a more rounded answer rather than my names jessica im 15 years old and i think monachy is bad... how stupid does that sound. you need sources, opinions and objections etc nowadays (whoever said gcses were easy)

apart from that thankyou anth thats useful... and im quite aware of google

fact: the queen and queen mother of netherlands, in 1903, were chucked in jail. tho even goole cannot explain why

 

[John^Lorenz^Naz^Cutiet]

True. But they also don't work to get achieve their status. I'd gladly put up with being stared at by a load of Americans if I had that much money.

 

[EmilioA]

but do they deserve the money ?

 

[HeroLeah]

I'm not sure the "tourists" argument really stands up. OK, London and Royal Deeside (N-East Scotland) benefits from it. But does the whole of the UK really fare better because we have a monarchy? I think if you compared the revenue we take in through tourism as a direct result of the Royals, with the money the taxpayers would save by NOT having them around, it would make for interesting reading. In fact, I'd go as far as to say there's not much difference at all.

 

[xdestinyx]

You have got to be joking.

You want an unelected monarch to have that sort of power?

IMO, the monarchy is an expensive piece of tradition. I just think that most people are happy with the way it is because it would take too much effort to form into a republic.

 

[wellzy101]

To a lot of Americans the concept of Monarchy seems downright wrong or at the very least a bit odd. Given their history that's not such a shocker I suppose.

I don't generally think of the monarchy until I see them on the news. And then they seem so quaint. LOL!

Though that old bird the queen is worth a fat sum ain't she.

 

[LittleStart]]

yes because they inherited most of it

i have a lot of time for prince charles as he has alot of very valid opinions on a variety of matters and i think william is also very down to earth. He is also the single biggest donour to charity (per capita per person) if i remember rightly.

they earn more than they cost in revenue and, more importantly, are part of british heritage. they houldnt have any powers (as it is at the moment) but i definately do not think they should be abolished.

 

[nephi]

I think monarchy is actually as close as you can get to ideal, provided your monarch is smart, benevolent, capable, and believes in human rights. Your problem lies in the fact that those people are few and far between.

In lieu of that: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those others that have been tried."

 

[ohnoitzmarwah]

a monarchy is just a dictatorship with a pre-determined dictator, as it stands in the UK, I dont much care either way, its nice to have a figurehead, and they dont do anything that affects me adversely so why get rid of them.

 

[DereckF]

No, I am not joking.

As I have said before, anything is better than Blair and his cronies and I have a loathing of the Tories.

 

[smart_sexy_gurl19]

I think the problem at the moment is that the Royal Family no longer has a point in there existance. Used to be the king/queen ruled the nation, made the decision etc. etc. but now some twerp in parliament does that while the queen just lives as a tourist attraction.

 

[yoohoorocket]

I must admit to not caring on a moral or political level but I'd say on balance I'd rather have them than not.

Oddly enough I was listening to a chap who had done a study on what the royals cost the state and what they money they generate. It was quite an eye opener. Can't remember the exact figures but basically what they cost was made tiny by the amount of money they generate. For example if they give their royal approval to a charity the charity can make upto an extra 100 million pounds. The tax gathered on sales of merchadise went into the hundreds of millions. Some areas they had to guess about, like tourism, but they said that even if they only accounted for 1 percent of the tourists deciding to come to the UK it would be worth hundreds of millions of pounds to the economy as well. Add to that the amount of goods we sell abroad off the back of a royal visit and yuo start to see a very good return on the investment.

Would be nice if they were a bit more aloof though, one expects ones royalty to treat the commoner with a shade more contempt

 

[Transmission]

You need sources and opinions from primary or secondary published resources, not the opinion of a load of martial artists. Look for reports from people who were there, or from proper historians who know what they're talking about. Or at worst, google.

As someone who's just marked a shed load of undergraduate essays, I can honestly tell you there's nothing worse than an essay full of unsubstantiated opinion.

And bare in mind, this message board is open to the whole world - your teacher could quite easily read that you're asking MAP to do your research for you!

 

[killaboi12369]

I don't care how bad Blair is, giving power to an unelected monarch is just like having a dictator.
Especially worrying since the monarchy allegedly has some inbreeding in its past.

I can only assume your loathing of the tories is because of the way you were brought up, as it was with me. If they can change, and get a younger leader in, then I would not have a problem voting for them (depending on their policies obviously). In particular, at least they won't hand out benefits and free cars to lazy arseholes who exist only to sit on their bums and expect the government to provide for them entirely.

 

[spacegoblin]

There are economic benefits to having the royal family, but I still resent any portion of my taxes going to support them, since they are amongst the richest people in the country, and perfectly capale of supporting themselves.

But my biggest objection to the royal family is the way that their existance reinforces the class system in this country, with all the problems that that causes. I'm thinking here of the grovelling, forelock-touching servility that afflicts so many people in this country.

We should sell the whole sorry shower of them to the Americans. They love 'em.