It is going to be interesting to see if any of this comes to pass over the next few years.
https://www.blogto.com/city/2022/09/people-think-canada-leave-commonwealth-become-republic/
I think it would be an interesting thing if instead of all the predictions of the downfall/end of the monarchy humanity decides there is actually a benefit to that and it picks up again. I'm just saying. When everyone (or many people) make similar statements (x has no choice but to happen!) history often has a way of throwing a wrench into that.
Just sayin.
@herukane I mean no offense, but what possible good is a monarchy?
@tgraf66 A connection to the past. A fixed point of memory. A method of having the ceremonial functions stripped from the political leadership.
Monarchy is an aspect of a government but it doesn't take away from a country being a free and clean democratic state.
I'm American, but I can see that there is nothing wrong with the idea of it, as long as its structured so its not 'a single autocrat who can remove freedoms' type structure.
I'm not saying I want it, I'm saying its an interesting political question. That said I don't think its one we should be having at the time that the country with it just lost their monarch.
@herukane Hi, the monarchy will still be, the same as in Europe probably, but the Monarch will no longer be head of State in the Commonwealth countries. The Commonwealth will also probably continue as a group, no longer with the Monarch as head. The Monarch as Head of State is mainly ceremonial, it is the having of your own countryman as the Head of State, rather than someone from another country.
Regards
Matildagirl
@herukane I would have to disagree. The negatives of a monarchy far out weigh any positives. Even a ceremonial monarchy only serves to focus attention on the outdated idea that any one person or group is better than, above, and/or more important than everyone else and is therefore antithetical to a truly democratic republic. If we need a connection to the past or fixed memories, we have art, history books, and statuary, all of which are far less expensive and intrusive.
Adding that the cost of maintaining a "display" monarchy is absurd. Those monies would be better used to help the citizens who need help, or to support infrastructure, etc.
Call me a commie, but I fail to see the point. Put a couple of jewels and lots of art in a museum, sell the rest.
I have been confused by the land ownership situation in the U.K. Decades ago when I spent a summer in London, I learned to my surprise that the Crown owned considerable land beneath many homes. So people who owned their own homes, did not own the land beneath and around their homes and had to pay rent for that land. Although land ownership rules are probably more complex now, this policy seems oppressive and kept people under the thumb of the Crown. But perhaps someone here can help me to understand it better.
Checking land ownership there now, it appears that the Crown owns a third of the U.K. land. I don't understand how this policy is allowed but likely it's more complex than it appears. Where I live in the U.S., you cannot sell your house but retain ownership of the land, except in condominium complexes, which perhaps should be scrutinized more than they are.
One aspect of the British monarchy I do not like is the assumption that the members of the British aristocracy are better than other people. It perpetuates an entitlement and a class system that is unjustified and harms the rest.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_ownership_in_the_United_Kingdom
I'm not a British citizen, so I really have no dog in this hunt, but I think that Pluto moving into Aquarius by 2024 until the 2040s will likely impact the monarchy. Pluto transforms, and Aquarius has to do with innovations and large groups of people. No imbalanced system (of wealth, property, influence, control) will be able to withstand this influence.
Also of astrological note: Charles acceded to the throne directly under a full moon in Pisces. Full moons represent culminations and/or endings, and Pisces is the final sign in the zodiac. To me this says that Charles's reign will be the last to operate in a more traditional way, and that the system that William inherits will have changed significantly by the time he becomes king.
Theoretically I agree: Elitism and huge class divides are problematic. But my understanding is that most of the British population actually LIKE having their Monarchy and the late Queen E has always inspired respect in much of the masses for her level-headedness, her dignity and her selflessness/devotion. The comforting Old Virtues. Plus the Monarchy is part of the UK's historic, core identity. Of course you occasionally DO get entitled jackasses too (Andrew and, imo Harry) but over all she played her cards right and course-corrected when necessary. She was the diametric opposite of the selfie-loving, vulgar narcissism of our current American Kardashian-loving/celebrity culture where talent, virtue, selflessness, modesty, etc. often mean absolutely nothing --and the idea of "duty" to anyone other than yourself is about as relevant as dinosaur eggs!! Anyone see Kim Kardashian's surgically-enhanced gigantic booty amply displayed in front of the American flag recently in Interview magazine?? She stated that SHE ( and, by inference, all that she represents) now constitutes "The American Dream". I honestly lost sleep over that one b/c there is a grain of truth to it. Put Queen E and KK side by side? Who would YOU rather have representing your country's core values??