Republicanism is a cause I feel extremely strongly about and is something I have got up and protested for in the past. Many of those in favour of monarchy will readily tell you that 'If we had a choice, monarchy probably wouldn't be the system we'd go for'-so that being the case, why should we keep (and fund) it? Some here have criticised those who sponge off welfare and government money because they can't be bothered to do a day's 'proper work'. I ask you, what have the infalliable Royals *done* for this country which merits adoration from all parts of the media and Old Etonians in the House?
You will be told that hosting banquets, cutting ribbons, and greeting foreign guests is all part of a hard day's labour for HM. Since when did eating a very large meal qualify as a hard day's graft (John Clarke aside)? It does not. A good number of Royals have taken part in some kind of military service over the years-good on them, but what gives them any more right to praise than all the others putting their lives on the line all over the globe? A life full of luxury and privileges for having the surname Windsor-yes, Britain really can call itself a true modern democracy. Like it or not, the system we have now *is* an unchallenged dictatorship-the total opposite to what a democracy ought to be.
Heck, HM had to be coerced into paying tax in the early '90s-any other family that tried to avoid it for so long would've been chucked into prison a long time ago. Even now, this tax rate is of the Queen's choosing (what a system eh), and cannot be disclosed owing to their exemption from the FOI act (funny, that doesn't seem to apply to anything else costing substantial public money). The Royals are also allowed the right to refuse any Parliamentary bill if it interferes with their personal interests-they have yet to actually do this, but for such a right to exist on the accident of birth cannot surely be taken as fair in anyone's mind.
So, why do we keep them? You'll often hear 'But they bring in tourism', 'But they're a part of our history', 'But we'd need to rewrite the constitution', as common arguments. Well-where do you think Buckingham Palace features in the 'most visited' UK attractions? Below the likes of Alton Towers and Thorpe Park is where it is-and this is a building which the taxpayer funds to maintain. Imagine if the Palace were free for all to explore all year round-without a monarchy, it's likely that tourism would actually increase. The likes of Germany and France don't seem to struggle in this area, I might add. So, the 'history' argument-if everything that is 'historic' is good, then shall we reintroduce rationing, slavery, and feudalism? The monarchy is a total anachronism in this day and age and has no place in a country that wants to consider itself progressive.
What of the alternative? 'President Blair' would only be so if he were the person chosen by the electorate-and he was 3 times on the spin. Yes, the voters may not always make the 'right' decision-but that is why elected heads of state are accountable; if a leader performs poorly, they do not get back in. If the monarch has a total free ride for 60 years, the voter is powerless to do anything about it-because the constitution is written to give unwavering privilege to the Windsor line. The Crown Estates and duchies would be returned to the government (as the latter were appropriated from peasants in the first place), giving yet more strength to the public purse-or do we all actually want £200 million a year to go to the Windsors for no justifiable reason, over things like our beleagured NHS? Now more than ever, it is so wrong for these people to be bathing in luxury off the back of their surname whilst the majority struggle seriously hard to pay the bills-but even if they were not, it makes the system no less out of place.
The current system insinuates that 60 million people in the UK are unfit to choose, let alone become, the leader of their own country. By birth, you are guaranteed to be no better than some descendent of Victoria because a piece of paper says so. A man with no understanding of environmental science is given all the scientific clout he pleases because mummy is the Queen. The people of this country deserve so much better than to have this farce of a system imposed upon them-inherited privilege sparks scorn when it comes to snooty peers in the House of Lords, so why is HM any different? She is not-and her and the rest of her family have enjoyed so much at our expense 'because they're British'. The UK will never move forward until these tax avoiding parasites are removed from their position and an accountable, efficient, and elected leader is put in their place-for 5 years, rather than however long they feel like it.
/rant.
