Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you don't understand why people care then you don't really understand Britain and the British.
That is a fair response - I think the answer to why people may care about the monarchy, especially when you live in the UK, is pretty obvious. That doesn't make it rational though. What I think IS to understand about most monarchists is that they simply will not listen to reasoned arguments about something as ridiculous as a King or Queen! British or not.
That is a fair response - I think the answer to why people may care about the monarchy, especially when you live in the UK, is pretty obvious. That doesn't make it rational though. What I think IS to understand about most monarchists is that they simply will not listen to reasoned arguments about something as ridiculous as a King or Queen! British or not.
Actually, I think attitudes towards the monarchy are rational. Most people prefer the monarchy to having an elected President who, generally, represents one side of the political divide. There is a sentiment that the monarch represents the nation in its entirety rather than just the people who elected him/her. That underlies a perspective on the separation between the Head of State and the Prime Minister who holds political power. Second, the monarch offers continuity which political leaders tend not to. Third, the armed forces allegiance is to the monarch rather than to their political masters. That provides a very fundamental check and balance.
But, essentially, I think Brits look around the world and they see a Putin or an Obama (or a Bush) and they really don't want that kind of person as Head of State. And they compare with HMtQ and you know what .... she looks pretty good in comparison.
The coinage will remain in circulation just as it did for previous monarchs. Bank notes have a shorter shelf-life so easier to phase out over a couple of years.
Canada has polymer banknotes which last 2.5 times longer than paper ones.
Actually, I think attitudes towards the monarchy are rational. Most people prefer the monarchy to having an elected President who, generally, represents one side of the political divide. There is a sentiment that the monarch represents the nation in its entirety rather than just the people who elected him/her. That underlies a perspective on the separation between the Head of State and the Prime Minister who holds political power. Second, the monarch offers continuity which political leaders tend not to. Third, the armed forces allegiance is to the monarch rather than to their political masters. That provides a very fundamental check and balance.
But, essentially, I think Brits look around the world and they see a Putin or an Obama (or a Bush) and they really don't want that kind of person as Head of State. And they compare with HMtQ and you know what .... she looks pretty good in comparison.
Thank you spelling this out but you have made my point for me with regard to irrational arguments.
1. I'm not sure if you're joking when you suggest that the British monarch represents the nation. I'm not sure the inherited lifestyle or $100m yacht (at a time of the worst recession in British history) feature in your thinking in this, but I'm not sure who exactly you feel the queen "represents"? The protestors of the Iraq war? Those apposed to austerity? What about those apposed to membership of the EU? Britain's immigration policy?? Please explain.
2. The majority of countries are republics, not just the US and Russia. Republics have a chance to continue with current choice, or end their post. You can never rid yourself of a position that is appointed through bloodline. Another point is that the monarch is absent in any leadership decisions anyway! You may as well not bother and just have a PM.
3. What continuity are you referring? Do you mean just having a monarch is nice because it is continuous??? Any system by it's definition is continuous. Presidents come and go with regularity placed on the position by the system.
4. Tony Blair sent the armed forces to a stupid war with disastrous consequences. If you think the Queen provides checks and balances in this area you're more naive than I thought possible.
5. I'm not sure how you can compare the queen to republic HoSs. It is apples and oranges. She has done literally nothing in her 63 years as HoS, and they nearly always have much to applaud or criticize.
You have not made a single point that makes logical sense, but that is precisely the point I was making.
Well, one thing for sure is that if it happens before January 20 of 2017, the President probably won't show up for her funeral. Much like the snafu he pulled when Margaret Thatcher died. Embarrassing beyond measure but, knowing him more now makes me think it was just his way of snubbing the old guard here in the US. She only stood by us during the entire cold war and technically, had more to lose than we did.
It has to be one of the most embarrassing head of state moves pulled in decades. Every time I see a Brit I almost feel compelled to apologize to them for our "leader's" ignorance and hatred of anything further right than a turn lane. It was protocol. You simply do it.
I feel she may very well be viewed the same by our President when she passes. However, she is the Queen and he knows a thing or two about feeling royal so, who knows?
Stop trying to bring your Republican party politics into this thread about the UK.
Our President is a head of state just as she is. Did her father attend FDR's funeral in 1945? Did Elizabeth II attend JFK's funeral in 1963 or Reagans? No she didn't. It was her choice. Her husband came to JFK's, and Churchill came to FDR's grave in 1946.
So our President shouldn't attend her funeral. Simple as that. More like protocol. Send the first Lady for VP, but not our head of state.
You have not made a single point that makes logical sense, but that is precisely the point I was making.
I disagree but I can't be bothered getting into a discussion about it with you because it won't go anywhere useful.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
