Google what happens if HRH the Queen dies

[mjr]

I reckon when Her Madge goes it will spell the end of the monarchy in its current form, i dont think "the people" will have the same depth of feeling for Chuck or Wills as they had for Betty and her mum. time for them to be downgraded like most of their European cousins

It is often said that Charles is the best encouragement for a republic that we've had in centuries!

That said, I suspect it's highly likely that he'll use his fourth(!) name upon accession and become King George VII because Charles, Philip and Arthur all have awkward problems - the first two Charles were deeply unpopular and Charles III was claimed, there's currently a King Philip VI ruling Spain and would he be King Arthur or King Arthur II? Whereas the last two King Georges were heroic war kings, weren't they?

 

[TVC]

Of course democracy works so much better as only candidates suitable for the job and of high intelligence get elected

If we follow the parallels then Alan Sugar could be our first President.

 

[mjr]

Of course democracy works so much better as only candidates suitable for the job and of high intelligence get elected

For every rule, there's an exception... The US has so far elected/appointed 45 presidents including maybe 4 unpopular ones (Trump, Dubya, Nixon, Buchanan) in the time that the UK has had 9 monarchs including maybe 3 unpopular ones (Edward VIII, George IV, George III). So it looks to me that even the somewhat dysfunctional US democracy has a better hit rate than UK inheritance... unless someone wants to argue for another 11 presidents as unpopular as the playboy or mad kings?

 

[Cycleops]

Likewise. I can't understand why people put other human beings on pedestals, worship them like demi-gods simply because of who their ancestors happened to be. No doubt there'll be people crying in the streets at the death of someone who, basically, represents fairy-tale monarchical fantasy world from yesteryear when kings & queens ruled the roost. And how did their ancestors happen to become 'royal' in the first place?. Probably back in tribal prehistoric times, it was a case of someone with a bigger club and bad attitude than others who fought their way to the top of the tree and thus decreed themselves to be 'royal'. There's nothing special about these people at all and I get fed up with the obsession with them.

Yep, as you may guess, I'm not a royalist. We should scrap the lot of them and become a modern republic. I sometimes think that the royal family only exist to give Daily Mail & Express journalists something to write about. All it will mean to me is that an elderly lady died (like everyone else) and there'll be someone else's head on stamp.

The French murdered all their royals and ended up with worms like Sarkozy and Hollande for Presidents.

 

[MichaelW2]

The most important job that the monarch does is to stop the Prime Minister from feeling too presidential.

 

[gavroche]

Certainly sounds like a comment from a Space Cadet. The French murdered all their royals and ended up with worms like Sarkozy and Hollande for Presidents.

Not all of them. Henry IV was stabbed to death in 1610 by Ravaillac and Louis XVI had his head chopped off. Don't exaggerate. I agree about the named worms though, especially the first one.

 

[jefmcg]

And how did their ancestors happen to become 'royal' in the first place?.

Well, seeing it's a (mostly) patrilineal title, and somewhere between 1% and 10% of children are not related to the man that believes he is their father, it's almost certain that the line of succession has been broken at least once, the common ancestor of the current royal family is mostly a cheeky groomsman or someone amusing in the court.

 

[stephec]

[QUOTE 4627190, member: 259"]I think Sir Philip Green might be slightly more appropriate. And Alan Sugar is a cyclist and can therefore Do No Wrong.[/QUOTE]

Err..

 

[mjr]

Err..

Yeah, but we know who's to blame for that:

Worst thing he ever did... oh wait...

 

[JoshM]

The French murdered all their royals and ended up with worms like Sarkozy and Hollande for Presidents.

While we've had a war criminal and someone who sexually abused a pig as our political leader...

I'm not sure there's much difference between a President and Prime Minister in terms of the day to day working of the political establishment. It's not Henry VIII on the throne and these days parliament sets the legislative agenda not the monarch.

 

[Fnaar]

Miss Goodbody seems to be under the misapprehension that I have something to do with the royals. She's asked me over tonight to "show her my crown jewels".

 

[User169]

Perhaps it's time for a completely new Royal family.

Well Legoland Windsor is a more popular tourist attraction than any of the various "Royal" attractions, so maybe..

 

[Cycleops]

I'm not sure there's much difference between a President and Prime Minister in terms of the day to day working of the political establishment. It's not Henry VIII on the throne and these days parliament sets the legislative agenda not the monarch.

Exactly, that's why we should have a monarch who is non political.

 

[jefmcg]

Exactly, that's why we should have a monarch who is non political.

Which we do at the moment. All indicators are that Chuck will think he has a political role.

 

[Cycleops]

Where do you reckon we can get one of those?

So you wouldn't apply then?