Would YOU stand for the National Anthem?

[french frank]

Fair enough. I suppose in the current discussion I was (over) influenced by the fact that an unelected head of state is not an issue I feel strongly about. Since we are, 'essentially', a democracy, I would let the majority lead on this. It is possible for a monarchy to be democratic - and several countries beat us on that point.

There are other more important (to me) points about our 'undemocratic democracy' that would come streets ahead of making a point about the monarchy. If the idea is that the first step towards a truly democratic society is to rid ourselves of the Royal Family, I disagree.

"Personal statements" of that kind, however, aren't necessarily intended to assuage some purely personal need - they might also be intended to communicate something, to suggest that others think about the issue, to show solidarity with those who might agree but perhaps aren't (yet) so forthright about expressing their opinion. Protesting is not just about saying no.

[teamsaint]

I'm not sure what order steps towards a "truly democratic" should come in, ( I doubt actually if anybody is) but as long as we have an unelected head of state, whose family are heavily involved in arms sales to anywhere , ( and including to some rather nasty regimes) then getting rid of the monarchy , both as a practical and symbolic move can't come soon enough .

And, FWIW, I do think that the power of the institution is in the validity it gives to a much wider and still very powerful system where power, wealth, influence are based on family privilege and connections, rather than some intrinsic merit.

[ahinton]

I'm not sure what order steps towards a "truly democratic" should come in, ( I doubt actually if anybody is) but as long as we have an unelected head of state, whose family are heavily involved in arms sales to anywhere , ( and including to some rather nasty regimes) then getting rid of the monarchy , both as a practical and symbolic move can't come soon enough .

And, FWIW, I do think that the power of the institution is in the validity it gives to a much wider and still very powerful system where power, wealth, influence are based on family privilege and connections, rather than some intrinsic merit.

But if your stance is (as I understand it to be) an anti-monarchist one, is your objection to the National Anthem and to some people's expectation people should stand for it when it is performed rooted in the copious references to the monarch in its text? If so, what might your view be were that anthem to be abolished and replaced with something like Fairest Isle which makes references to the nation (or at least to the land that it occupies) but none to the monarch and her/his family? Moreover, were UK to become a Republic, would you still consider it acceptable for it to have a National Anthem (as almost all countries do)? and, if so, what would be your expectation of people standing for it when it's performed?

[Richard Barrett]

If the idea is that the first step towards a truly democratic society is to rid ourselves of the Royal Family, I disagree.

I don't think anyone has said that. It isn't even a step really - abolishing the monarchy would be a sign that a certain stage had been reached in progress towards democracy and social justice. At a certain point it becomes an obvious and almost trivial move. Although, as teamsaint points out, their position in British society is more pernicious than most people think. The fact that there are still plenty of people around who think they are harmless or beneficial is a sign that the aforementioned progress still has plenty of obstacles in its way.

[Serial_Apologist]

But if your stance is (as I understand it to be) an anti-monarchist one, is your objection to the National Anthem and to some people's expectation people should stand for it when it is performed rooted in the copious references to the monarch in its text? If so, what might your view be were that anthem to be abolished and replaced with something like Fairest Isle which makes references to the nation (or at least to the land that it occupies) but none to the monarch and her/his family? Moreover, were UK to become a Republic, would you still consider it acceptable for it to have a National Anthem (as almost all countries do)? and, if so, what would be your expectation of people standing for it when it's performed?

In my case, (and I cautiously would suggest teamsaint's), something "like" Fairest Isle would be the least appropriate title for any replacement national anthem, given the present and likelily continuing state of political affairs. To even contemplate standing, let alone standing for, anything remotely denoting patriotic fervour, goes right against the grain for me, and to be honest, always would, nations being the artifical entities that they are, dividing peoples from peoples on behalf of privileged classes who have already done enough damage to said peoples, along with their environments by these and other such systems of deliberate division.

I might just stand for the sake of standing, because making a futile individual gesture rarely advances the prospect of a better, genuinely democratic world, even by famous and much-admired celebrities.

[vinteuil]

.

... apart from notions of politeness, it's often better to stand anyway -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24532996

[Serial_Apologist]

.

... apart from notions of politeness, it's often better to stand anyway -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24532996

And in a crowded world, one takes up less valuable space, of course.

[P. G. Tipps]

p. g. tipps

I certainly agree that there are lot more important issues now facing the UK than whether it retains the Monarchy or not. Though I am not a member of any political party I cannot deny a distinct sense of welcome relief on hearing the news this morning ... centrism and moderation are not completely dead after all!

However, it seems silly to dump a powerless figurehead, who, along with the associated family, boosts the UK tourist industry immeasurably, for an equally-powerless 'democratically-elected' political appointee who will ultimately and inevitably create no benefit to the economy whatsover? And then, no doubt, simply be dumped in exchange for yet another quite forgettable and possibly utterly useless candidate?

Republicanism may well be best elsewhere in the world but the UK seems perfectly capable of getting on pretty well without it ... so why change?

[french frank]

I don't think anyone has said that. It isn't even a step really - abolishing the monarchy would be a sign that a certain stage had been reached in progress towards democracy and social justice. At a certain point it becomes an obvious and almost trivial move.

And I would go along with that. Let it happen as an obvious and almost trivial move, after other changes have been achieved.

Although, as teamsaint points out, their position in British society is more pernicious than most people think. The fact that there are still plenty of people around who think they are harmless or beneficial is a sign that the aforementioned progress still has plenty of obstacles in its way.

Although, if one is going to be pedantic, teamsaint expresses the opinion. A Royal Brood throws up good and bad from time to time. I think bothering too much about them, Poundbury, carbuncles and Prince Endra notwithstanding, is little to the point.

There are individuals who have access to more billions in this country than the Queen who doesn't feature in the top 300 of the UK's Rich List this year, but is regarded symbolically as embodying much that is wrong with society. Much is wrong, but homing in on the Royles is - in my view only, of course - looking in the wrong place. Though they are a soft target, I'll admit that.

[MrGongGong]

However, it seems silly to dump a powerless figurehead, who, along with the associated family, boosts the UK tourist industry immeasurably,

I know it goes against the grain
BUT where is the EVIDENCE for this ?

Sounds a bit more like received wisdom to me

[visualnickmos]

I know it goes against the grain
BUT where is the EVIDENCE for this ?

Sounds a bit more like received wisdom to me

Boosts the tourist industry! - sounds like bollocks to me - but PG probably knows that, and was being his/her usual mischievous self!

[P. G. Tipps]

I know it goes against the grain
BUT where is the EVIDENCE for this ?

Sounds a bit more like received wisdom to me

Well, I hugely admire any man/woman who challenges 'received wisdom', so why don't you support a call for a referendum to fully vindicate your doubts on the issue, MrGG ... ?

Not that I'm generally in favour of this wretchedly shabby political practice, you understand, but maybe 'needs must' on this particular occasion!

[french frank]

I know it goes against the grain
BUT where is the EVIDENCE for this ?

Sounds a bit more like received wisdom to me

Not my argument, but possibly tourists visiting the places which have royal associations.

"Of 25,000 potential foreign visitors surveyed by VisitBritain, 60% said they would like to see places associated with the Royal Family and several others said they would send home a postcard of the Queen."

[MrGongGong]

Well, I hugely admire any man/woman who challenges 'received wisdom', so why don't you support a call for a referendum to fully vindicate your doubts on the issue, MrGG ... ?

Not that I'm generally in favour of this wretchedly shabby political practice, you understand, but maybe 'needs must' on this particular occasion!

I don't think asking lots of stupid people questions is a good way to organise things
NOR do I think that I should be in charge of anything

[MrGongGong]

Not my argument, but possibly tourists visiting the places which have royal associations.

"Of 25,000 potential foreign visitors surveyed by VisitBritain, 60% said they would like to see places associated with the Royal Family and several others said they would send home a postcard of the Queen."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/the-biggest-myth-about-the-queen-her-contribution-to-the-british-economy-10491277.html

https://www.republic.org.uk/what-we-want/monarchy-myth-buster/its-good-tourism

So not what Johnny said then