how do you feel about monarchy?
546203
It provides a long term stability and a focus for the people as an assistance to National Identity. It is a good way to govern in circumstances where a public vote would lead to a greater mess. i.e. in times of war or where anarchy is developing. \n\nIt is also good in these circumstances for other governments to deal with a familiar face that they may have trusted 20 years before rather than some passing democrat with an ego!( I just ruined this..lol )\n\nActually a problem that i have noted is that when Monarchy was popular as a way of ruling life expectancy was about 45 so you took the thrown for 20 years say from 25-45 1 generation) the trouble now is life goes on for say 75 years so you rule between 55 and 75 and frankly you are a bit wiser but equally a bit more past it.
781308
LOL at some of these answers...\n\nTheres a song that says it all... "Everybody wants to rule the world"\n\nYour feelings are that of wanting to create a utopian society, and while it is good in theroy, human nature rarely coincides so neatly with these views.\n\nBest of luck on your quest, though....
596076
I presume you are British, as I am. I believe in the Royal Family for one important reason; national pride.\n\nSure they don't do much, or even really have that much power any more. But the monarchy if what defines Britain and being British to a lot of people, especially those from abroad.\n\nBritain has sold out big time; there are maybe two truly British car companies left (Ariel and Noble, off the top of my head- even Morgan is powered by BMW!) when there were literally dozens in the post-war era. Our sports are dominated by foreign talent; how many of Manchester United's team are actually from Manchester- or even Britain at all?! The England team manager is foreign. A large percentage of British companies, from retail to technology, are owned by foreign interests.\n\nThe rates of immigration are soaring, although this in itself is a good thing as it promotes world knowledge and understanding to those who will isten. The English language is becoming saturated with slang derived from these foreign migrants and the old school virtues of chivalry and the good old British gentleman have been flushed down the pan.\n\nMy grandfathers, and thousands of others, fought for the British way of life, their 'King and Country', and we should honour them by upholding the traditional British values they lived and died by, whilst moving forward in to a new world with the rest of the globe.\n\nEven our patron Saint, George, was a Turk, and I am not oblivious to the fact that the British royal family were, in themselves, of Nazi stock. However, we must forgive (but not always forget) the blemishes of the past; living in a multi-cultural society has given us the opportunity to do just this whilst upholding our common values of decency and strength in the face of adversity.\n\nSo yes, I think we should keep the royal family even if, I admit, Prince Phillip has never ironed my shirt or made me a cup of tea. They are a bastion of British culture when few others remain. Ask anyone what the first things that come to mind are when you say 'Britain'- I'll bet the queen will be in there, along with Buckingham Palace. And bad teeth. Remember the monarchy also represents our kin in Canada, Australia and a few more places that I wil not list here. \n\nRule Brittania!\n\nAnd...breath...
1095667
The native Australians think the same thing. The monarchy is a tradition, and a very expensive one at that. I would like to know why that tradition is upheld because they have no power. they are basically useless.
875361
Only subjects should bow/curstey to their own monarchs. If you are an American, a simple handshake is proper etiquette.
846554
Is it fair that Prince William gets to be king and I don't?\n\nIs it fair to everyone else in the UK that their tax dollars go to support a family of unelected morons?\n\nLife isn't fair.  From where I'm sitting, Prince William is one of the luckiest of us.
1052123
I think first it depends if the monarchy will even be around when William assumes the throne.  As it has been mentioned, the Queen could live to be as old as her mother did, and that means we might have to wait a long time before William is King.  I do not see anything wrong with William giving his mother royal status again, that would be a nice way to honor her, especially since she will be the late King's mother and she should be afforded all the perks and pomp that goes along with it, even in death.
706673
No!  Democracy is not compatible with royalty, a position held by accident of birth rather than popular mandate. I'd like a Head of State that we can vote in - and vote out - and with a monarchy you never get the chance to do either. I also resent being classified as a 'subject' rather than a 'citizen'.\n\nThe USA, without royalty,  is closer to being democratic than the UK, but the crazy electoral college system can distort the result, as in 2000, when Gore defeated Bush by at least half a million votes.  Why doesn't the USA simply add up all the votes across the country, as, for example, the French do?
993640
dropped dead is a bit harsh. How about tripped up and decided it was time to knock it on the head?\nAs I am in favour of getting rid of the entire collection of Royals I am probably not the best person to answer this...\nI think we should all have a  go at being monarch for a week and it could be televised, if youa re rubbish you get voted straight out if you are good you get an extra week.\nIt could be called One's Big Brother.
516214
My daughters, my freedom (though this is continually threatened by the religious right and the politicians that they are in bed with), all of nature, and life itself.\n\nOneChess
673863
well i am not a very big supporter of monarchy no matter whatever country it is in.\nbut you guys in britain should be glad that your royal family atleast doesnt messes with the government and its running.\n\nthough i agree with you that spending so much money on the royal family serves no purpose but sometimes somethings are just part of your history and you cant do away with them.\n\nmaybe you could try abolishing the monarchy after her death.
1044366
The United States would go into chaos if we had a monarchy! Most people don't have a clue about how the royal families work, or Parliament, for that matter (if you are saying we should have royalty like the U.K.). To change our way way of existence as a nation to having a royal family would be a complete 180.\n\nWho would be our king and queen, anyway? Brangelina?
957266
Like all English schoolchildren of the 1950's I was brought up to have an immoveable respect for the Royal Family, 'King and Country' and so on. When the old king died I remember us kids being taken to watch the funeral cortege go by. The coffin was carried on a gun carriage and it rained. A few months later we were taken to the same spot to watch Princess Elizabeth go by in the Royal coach to be crowned queen. We were all given Union Flags to wave and received a Coronation Mug. I lost mine. Later we had street parties with sandwiches and jelly and, guess what? it rained again.\n\nIn those days the institution of the Royal Family was sacrosanct with not a hint or whsiper of scandal or wrongdoing until the late 1950's when it started with Princess Margaret having an affair with a married man, Group Captain Peter Townsend. That was soon hushed up and she ended up marrying Anthony Armstrong Jones, an arranged marriage if ever there was one.\n\nAs time went by and old traditions and protocols started to vanish it became apparent that the Royal family were not the 'whiter than white' exemplary characters we had been led to believe and since those days there have been many sordid revelations and scandals that have tarnished the Royals forever.\n\nPrince Philip (Phil the Greek) comes across as an arrogant despot who loves to throw his weight about and cares about no-one except himself manging to have insuleted most of the world's leaders at one time or another. He, singlehandedly, managed to ostracise Canada, Australia, India and Hong Kong so that all of them and much of Africa broke away from British rule.\n\nPrincess Margaret came across as a gin-swilling, chain smoking good time girl who would party until the small hours, often drunk, and escorted by a variety of 'gentlemen'.\n\nPrince Charles came across as a bit of a wimp whose main hobby seemed to be talking to plants and bedding as many women as he could.\n\nPrincess Anne came across with an arrogance that can only be described as unique and loved nothing but horses. To her credit she was the hardest working Royal, if you can call it work, attending more functions that any other.\n\nRrince Andrew was the original good time charlie who spent much of his time in nightclubs, drinking and womanising and running up more expenses than any of the others. How can you justify having the Royal jet fly him from London to Scotland for a night out at a cost of £20000 to the taxpayer?\n\nPrince Edward came across as a bit of a nancy boy preferring to spend his time with actors and producers and it was widely assumed that he was homosexual until his marriage to Sophie. Some of us still wonder.\n\nThen there's the spouses. Sarah Ferguson married Andrew having been  living with a rally driver for a number of years and proved to be the good time that had been had by all, spending like there was no tomorrow and generally being an embarrassment.\n\nCharles married Diana, the girl who didn't seem to have a single brain cell until Charlie dumped her and her publicity machine created the 'Saint Diana' image. I'm sorry she died but I, personally, had no time for her.\n\nAnne had a variety of husbands starting with Captain Mark Phillips who famously hid behind her when someone attacked her car as it drove down the Mall. He was dumped for the present incumbant who probably likes horses better than he did.\n\nFinally the queen. She comes across as very aloof and money grasping. She is well known for being a skinflint paying her staff the smallest wages in London yet being the wealthiest woman in the world. She shows no emotion at all except to smile when she is cheered.\n\nthere are many other peripheral members of the family all of whom live in wealth and privelege just for being born into the family of Germans who usurped the British throne 200 years ago.\nPersonally I now think we'd be better off without the whole rotten mess of them but th
514887
Boy, bungiebabe woke up on the wrong side of the political coin this morning, eh? Too bad about his approval rating, btw. Finally proves what people like me have been trying to tell you for years now: Little King George and his tyranny cannot be tolerated. It is about time that people start calling a spade a spade. Guess what, King George followers - The emperor has no clothes! \n\nSo keep bowing to his smirking, bobble-head approach to leadership. After all, isn't making others feel insignificant how you types manage to feel so good about yourselves?
887651
Love all of the music you referenced.  I'd have to follow Queen's lead, but either way the political pendulum swings, we'll keep "fighting for the right to party."
961010
How would you feel if some foregion nation came in and invaded and installed their puppet?
509235
The same way I feel about the WHOLE WORLD. The GOOD people of any race, religion, political system etc., better take care of the BAD people of that same race, religion, political system etc.,THEMSELVES, befor someone's  GOOD people of a different race, religion, political system etc., DOES IT FOR THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!   Now ain't that right?