8 ms·

Time to end on a high? Shall we just abandon this whole monarchy thing and time to flip over to a republic and leave the much revered queen as the last ever mo

Time to end on a high? Shall we just abandon this whole monarchy thing and time to flip over to a republic and leave the much revered queen as the last ever monarch of the UK? Seems like Scotland is going to go independent, and if Scotland do Wales will only be a matter of time so may as well just can it now?

cameronh90 4y ago
I believe that Charles is now officially already king.
- philistine 4y ago
  The phrase the King is dead long live the King exists to make sense of the whole concept. A throne is never empty. The second Elizabeth died, Charles became king.
  - mechanical_bear 4y ago
    But coronation will not occur for about a year.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
      Coronation is just a ceremony.
  - frereubu 4y ago
    This threw me back to studying Ionesco at school - "Le roi se meurt! Vive le roi!"
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- lawlorino 4y ago
  Yes I think this is the case. The death announcement from Buckingham Palace refers to him as such. "The Queen died peacefully at Balmoral this afternoon. The King and The Queen Consort will remain at Balmoral this evening and will return to London tomorrow."
david927 4y ago
Yes! Let's push this as hard as possible. Monarchies are an affront to all Enlightenment ideals and belong in the history books.
- unethical_ban 4y ago
  Are they? Elizabeth nor Charles are claiming devine right. They are a unfiying vestige of times past, providing as she did a human constant, an embodiment of the Commonwealth. So long as their heredity isn't overtly providing them the ability or write or enforce law, it does not seem an affront to democracy.
  - wowokay 4y ago
    Agreed
  - kahrl 4y ago
    The royal prerogative includes the powers to appoint and dismiss ministers, regulate the civil service, issue passports, declare war, make peace, direct the actions of the military, and negotiate and ratify treaties, alliances, and international agreements. While Elizabeth has CHOSEN to not use these powers much, any future monarch can. Just look at the U.S. in the last 6 years to see what happens when a country relies more on historical norms rather than law.
    - zeslinguer 4y ago
      Not just Elizabeth but any other British Monarch in the last 300 years. The UK has one of the oldest and strongest democracies around.
    - kwhitefoot 4y ago
      > The royal prerogative includes the powers to ... Not really. In practice these powers belong to parliament and the monarch performs a merely ceremonial role; actions are performed in his or her name but not at her behest. In the English constitution parliament is sovereign and the monarch acts on its instructions.
kisero 4y ago
Definitely agree
Someone 4y ago
Having the United Kingdom is orthogonal to them being monarchies. Australia and Canada are independent, but also monarchies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Australia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Canada), so, presumably, Scotland and Wales could choose to do the same.
wowokay 4y ago
I know none of us knew her personally but this doesn’t seem like a sentiment shared by most, and it is definitely not something to bring up when she isn’t even in the ground yet.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
mhh__ 4y ago
With the queen gone the questions around royal consent and Prince Andrew and Charles nuttier opinions will be much harder to answer.
frereubu 4y ago
Recent polls show support for Scottish independence dropping. Charles becoming king may affect that of course, but I wouldn't say it's at all clear that "Scotland is going to go independent". I agree on the idea of dropping the monarchy on a high though, as long as we go for a presidential system similar to Ireland rather than the USA...
- andrepd 4y ago
  A President which is more or less an elected Queen of England is all I ask at this point.
  - frereubu 4y ago
    Which is pretty much what happens in Ireland: https://s3.scoopwhoop.com/anj2/5e65e3cf2f1b745e07bed5fa/ceaf9add-922a-4f07-a9bd-701df72aa4e5.jpg https://s3.scoopwhoop.com/anj2/5e65e3cf2f1b745e07bed5fa/ceaf...
    - walthamstow 4y ago
      Germany and Italy too
    - talideon 4y ago
      There's always room for Miggledy!
- kwhitefoot 4y ago
  Why do you need a president?
  - talideon 4y ago
    Because it's a good idea to separate the role of head of state from that of head of government as a bulwark against governments taking unconstitutional actions. It also gives you an apolitical chief diplomat and a respected voice outside of party politics that helps moderate discourse and to counterbalance executive power.
blibble 4y ago
- monsieurgaufre 4y ago
  Why should we? It's a perfect moment to think about this.
- ProAm 4y ago
- UI_at_80x24 4y ago
- dopamean 4y ago
- jobs_throwaway 4y ago
  she's dead, it's not going to offend her anymore
  - acchow 4y ago
    Her family is in mourning tho
    - aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
- dang 4y ago
  Please don't cross into personal attack. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - blibble 4y ago
    which part of that is a personal attack?
zeslinguer 4y ago
Not sure where you're getting the idea Scotland is likely to go independent, the 'no' vote has been consistently 5% higher than 'yes' for a long time, except for during Partygate. Add in the fact that the Tories will likely not be in government, an aggressive Russia (SNP policy is to get rid of their nukes) and it's probably unlikely. Welsh independence is polling at 25%
gwbas1c 4y ago
As an American, I kind of envy the fact that there's a referee who can step in when needed. She stepped into Australia's government shut down and fired the whole government in the 1970s during a government shutdown. It works because she receives extensive training to be apolitical. (And if she is political, there are repercussions.)
- Waterluvian 4y ago
  There isn’t. If the Queen ever steps in, it’s immediately a constitutional crisis that threatens the entire legitimacy of our democracy. Her role has been purely ceremonial for the longest time. At least this is true for Canada. I have to imagine it’s very similar for the rest of the Commonwealth. Every instance of involvement that wasn’t ceremonial has been doing precisely what the Prime Minister has requested of her via the Governor General, such as dissolving parliament. Which I guess makes that ceremonial too.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
de6u99er 4y ago
I think it's overdue. IMO Brexit would not have happened if GB wouldn't be a monarchy.
ithinkso 4y ago
I think that when people see the world 'monarchy' they still have the vision and ideas of monarchies from medival ages. Modern european monarchies that are still around are nothing but and, to be honest, I have no idea what would have changed really if they were no longer here
petercooper 4y ago
Shall we just abandon this whole monarchy thing and time to flip over to a republic and leave the much revered queen as the last ever monarch of the UK? I'd vote no, because then we'd end up with people like Boris Johnson or Liz Truss as our head of state(!!) The monarch nowadays is important for what they prevent. The Queen stood in the way of someone like Boris getting access to all the 'bling' of state. A big shift would need to occur before we could become a sensible republic, particularly in dismantling a lot of the ceremonial aspects of British life. Perhaps even a collective head of state like the Swiss could work.

cameronh90 4y ago

I believe that Charles is now officially already king.

philistine 4y ago
The phrase the King is dead long live the King exists to make sense of the whole concept. A throne is never empty. The second Elizabeth died, Charles became king.
- mechanical_bear 4y ago
  But coronation will not occur for about a year.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
    Coronation is just a ceremony.
- frereubu 4y ago
  This threw me back to studying Ionesco at school - "Le roi se meurt! Vive le roi!"
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
lawlorino 4y ago
Yes I think this is the case. The death announcement from Buckingham Palace refers to him as such. "The Queen died peacefully at Balmoral this afternoon. The King and The Queen Consort will remain at Balmoral this evening and will return to London tomorrow."

david927 4y ago

Yes! Let's push this as hard as possible. Monarchies are an affront to all Enlightenment ideals and belong in the history books.

unethical_ban 4y ago
Are they? Elizabeth nor Charles are claiming devine right. They are a unfiying vestige of times past, providing as she did a human constant, an embodiment of the Commonwealth. So long as their heredity isn't overtly providing them the ability or write or enforce law, it does not seem an affront to democracy.
- wowokay 4y ago
  Agreed
- kahrl 4y ago
  The royal prerogative includes the powers to appoint and dismiss ministers, regulate the civil service, issue passports, declare war, make peace, direct the actions of the military, and negotiate and ratify treaties, alliances, and international agreements. While Elizabeth has CHOSEN to not use these powers much, any future monarch can. Just look at the U.S. in the last 6 years to see what happens when a country relies more on historical norms rather than law.
  - zeslinguer 4y ago
    Not just Elizabeth but any other British Monarch in the last 300 years. The UK has one of the oldest and strongest democracies around.
  - kwhitefoot 4y ago
    > The royal prerogative includes the powers to ... Not really. In practice these powers belong to parliament and the monarch performs a merely ceremonial role; actions are performed in his or her name but not at her behest. In the English constitution parliament is sovereign and the monarch acts on its instructions.

kisero 4y ago

Definitely agree

Someone 4y ago

Having the United Kingdom is orthogonal to them being monarchies. Australia and Canada are independent, but also monarchies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Australia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Canada), so, presumably, Scotland and Wales could choose to do the same.

wowokay 4y ago

I know none of us knew her personally but this doesn’t seem like a sentiment shared by most, and it is definitely not something to bring up when she isn’t even in the ground yet.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

mhh__ 4y ago

With the queen gone the questions around royal consent and Prince Andrew and Charles nuttier opinions will be much harder to answer.

frereubu 4y ago

Recent polls show support for Scottish independence dropping. Charles becoming king may affect that of course, but I wouldn't say it's at all clear that "Scotland is going to go independent". I agree on the idea of dropping the monarchy on a high though, as long as we go for a presidential system similar to Ireland rather than the USA...

andrepd 4y ago
A President which is more or less an elected Queen of England is all I ask at this point.
- frereubu 4y ago
  Which is pretty much what happens in Ireland: https://s3.scoopwhoop.com/anj2/5e65e3cf2f1b745e07bed5fa/ceaf9add-922a-4f07-a9bd-701df72aa4e5.jpg https://s3.scoopwhoop.com/anj2/5e65e3cf2f1b745e07bed5fa/ceaf...
  - walthamstow 4y ago
    Germany and Italy too
  - talideon 4y ago
    There's always room for Miggledy!
kwhitefoot 4y ago
Why do you need a president?
- talideon 4y ago
  Because it's a good idea to separate the role of head of state from that of head of government as a bulwark against governments taking unconstitutional actions. It also gives you an apolitical chief diplomat and a respected voice outside of party politics that helps moderate discourse and to counterbalance executive power.

blibble 4y ago

monsieurgaufre 4y ago
Why should we? It's a perfect moment to think about this.
ProAm 4y ago
UI_at_80x24 4y ago
dopamean 4y ago
jobs_throwaway 4y ago
she's dead, it's not going to offend her anymore
- acchow 4y ago
  Her family is in mourning tho
  - aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
dang 4y ago
Please don't cross into personal attack. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- blibble 4y ago
  which part of that is a personal attack?

zeslinguer 4y ago

Not sure where you're getting the idea Scotland is likely to go independent, the 'no' vote has been consistently 5% higher than 'yes' for a long time, except for during Partygate. Add in the fact that the Tories will likely not be in government, an aggressive Russia (SNP policy is to get rid of their nukes) and it's probably unlikely. Welsh independence is polling at 25%

gwbas1c 4y ago

As an American, I kind of envy the fact that there's a referee who can step in when needed. She stepped into Australia's government shut down and fired the whole government in the 1970s during a government shutdown. It works because she receives extensive training to be apolitical. (And if she is political, there are repercussions.)

Waterluvian 4y ago
There isn’t. If the Queen ever steps in, it’s immediately a constitutional crisis that threatens the entire legitimacy of our democracy. Her role has been purely ceremonial for the longest time. At least this is true for Canada. I have to imagine it’s very similar for the rest of the Commonwealth. Every instance of involvement that wasn’t ceremonial has been doing precisely what the Prime Minister has requested of her via the Governor General, such as dissolving parliament. Which I guess makes that ceremonial too.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

de6u99er 4y ago

I think it's overdue. IMO Brexit would not have happened if GB wouldn't be a monarchy.

ithinkso 4y ago

I think that when people see the world 'monarchy' they still have the vision and ideas of monarchies from medival ages. Modern european monarchies that are still around are nothing but and, to be honest, I have no idea what would have changed really if they were no longer here

petercooper 4y ago

Shall we just abandon this whole monarchy thing and time to flip over to a republic and leave the much revered queen as the last ever monarch of the UK? I'd vote no, because then we'd end up with people like Boris Johnson or Liz Truss as our head of state(!!) The monarch nowadays is important for what they prevent. The Queen stood in the way of someone like Boris getting access to all the 'bling' of state. A big shift would need to occur before we could become a sensible republic, particularly in dismantling a lot of the ceremonial aspects of British life. Perhaps even a collective head of state like the Swiss could work.