...Anyone Enjoy the Trooping?

[scottycelt]

SHB says it all, and there is little else to add.

Apart from the obvious fact that British republicans are in such a small minority they may as well give up. The British people (rightly in my view) overwhelmingly wish to retain the monarchy (warts and all), according to every opinion poll conducted in modern times.

Other nations are different and can and will make their own arrangements, but the British have steadfastly stuck to what they instinctively know what is right for their own country, so what could be more truly democratic than that?

Maybe republicans might like to urgently lobby the government to have a republican-style referendum on the issue so that the peoples' voice might be heard?

[MrGongGong]

The British people (rightly in my view) overwhelmingly wish to retain the monarchy (warts and all), according to every opinion poll conducted in modern times.

:

They also think that Andrew Lloyd Webber is a Great Composer

so I wouldn't hold too much store by what most people think !

[aeolium]

80 years ago most people thought the Empire was wonderful. Opinions (and institutions) can change.

[scottycelt]

I wouldn't hold too much store by what most people think !

I thought you so-called 'republicans' were supposed to be democratic ... ?

[teamsaint]

the people at the top have their position justified by the hereditary monarchy.
they hold the power, land , money and influence.
the people can't even get a vote on it all, let alone try to win one against the stacked odds.
most of the people i know, and that is a wide variety of people , think the people at the top, from aristocracy to bankers, are a waste of space who bleed this country dry while the rest of us work to pay for their indulgences.

I and the people I know work TOO BLOODY HARD to put up with this nonsense.

[Freddie Campbell]

...So let's have Scotty's Referendum?!

[umslopogaas]

scottycelt post 64

"... republicans supposed to be democratic ...?"

In a democracy, dissenting voices are allowed, even those of republicans who object to the voicing of dissent.

But in a republic, will the dissenting voices of democracy be allowed?

I know where I'd rather live. I dont want my hands on the levers of power. Neither do I want to be denied access to those that wield them.

There's a great quote by Voltaire, which I cant immediately find, but it goes something like this: 'I disagree with all the things you say, and I defend to the death your right to say them."

In a democracy, that right will prevail.

In a republic, I doubt it. Security, old chap, security above all. The leaders wont tolerate dissention among the ranks, what? Sure you'll understand, dont want to mention it again ...

[teamsaint]

scottycelt post 64

"... republicans supposed to be democratic ...?"

In a democracy, dissenting voices are allowed, even those of republicans who object to the voicing of dissent.

But in a republic, will the dissenting voices of democracy be allowed?

I know where I'd rather live. I dont want my hands on the levers of power. Neither do I want to be denied access to those that wield them.

There's a great quote by Voltaire, which I cant immediately find, but it goes something like this: 'I disagree with all the things you say, and I defend to the death your right to say them."

In a democracy, that right will prevail.

In a republic, I doubt it. Security, old chap, security above all. The leaders wont tolerate dissention among the ranks, what? Sure you'll understand, dont want to mention it again ...

Huh?

[Freddie Campbell]

...Well look at France-They have all that-yet they will infight with their own shadow(as well as everyone else's!)

[Stillhomewardbound]

the people at the top have their position justified by the hereditary monarchy.
they hold the power, land , money and influence.
the people can't even get a vote on it all, let alone try to win one against the stacked odds.
most of the people i know, and that is a wide variety of people , think the people at the top, from aristocracy to bankers, are a waste of space who bleed this country dry while the rest of us work to pay for their indulgences.

I and the people I know work TOO BLOODY HARD to put up with this nonsense.

Well, hang on a mo, I have before me three outstanding chaps who'll be able to assure you how wrong you are. Why, they are whiter than white!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13771099

[Paul Sherratt]

Glad to see they're at the coalface, stillhomeward.
Right in the thick of it.

[french frank]

A clown maybe, but if people don't like him they can get rid of him. A better system than our lucky sperm contest IMHO.

But the two offices of Head of State are different: the French president is part of the government, has political powers and has a particular party allegiance (hence can be voted out like any other politician), the British monarch doesn't.

[Freddie Campbell]

...I think the Monarch provides an additional "Safety-Valve" for Political failure in agreement...(apart from our votes of course)

[aeolium]

There are other examples of republics where the presidency is largely ceremonial rather than an office where powers are exercised - the Irish Republic, e.g. where the election of Mary Robinson a while back gives the lie to the claim that elected Presidents will invariably be discredited politicians. In fact, were there a republic in the UK, with a largely ceremonial Presidential office, I'm not sure that politicians who crave power - like Blair - would be interested in standing for election.

[french frank]

e.g. where the election of Mary Robinson a while back gives the lie to the claim that elected Presidents will invariably be discredited politicians

As does another e.g.: Mary McAleese.