3 ms·
Sure, yeah, I see that the monarch doesn't exercise much power; from the outside, the monarchy doesn't look like a practical problem. Until I read [commenter
by feral 10y ago
Sure, yeah, I see that the monarch doesn't exercise much power; from the outside, the monarchy doesn't look like a practical problem.
Until I read [commenter from military family on HN] talking about sworn allegiances when "push comes to shove". That's when I go 'woah'.
>The monarch is someone who has been heavily trained in diplomacy and politics
And born into a life of privilege, where even if they do very little, they'll still reign.
I'd rather take the cohort of random citizens who work their way up through a [very imperfect] selection process which selects a leader/representative.
- vacri 10y ago> And born into a life of privilege, where even if they do very little, they'll still reign. Well, the monarch has a lot of duties-of-state. An endless procession of people to meet and ceremony to conduct. It's not like the UK monarch gets to laze it up in the sun on yacht in the azure coast week in, week out. And the nearby royal family do have to engage in some 'good works', or they will lose their social position to people asking 'wtf!?'. All the name-brand royals are heavily involved in charities and causes in this modern era, because if they start ignoring 'social duty', they'll lose their privilege. The days of the monarch just doing as he or she pleases are long gone, in the UK at least. While "it's good to be the king", it's also not a lazy life. You also have to play the part and behave somewhat beyond reproach - the military aren't going to take their vows to the monarch so seriously if she started dressing and behaving like Johnnie Rotten.