Abolishing the Monarchy

[Red October]

will the english monarchy ever be abolished without the revolution? some people i was talking to said some moves in england have been taken in that direction through the democratic process. is this true?

[ihaterockandroll]

Unfortunatly not, there have been reforms to the Lords system, getting rid of most of the hereditary peers and replacing them with quoata's from the different parties in parliament. The Monarchy have no real power via convention but they do still technically hold all the power in the country. They are more symbolic then anything else now.

xx

[razboz]

Originally posted by Red October [email protected] 11, 2007 05:26 pm
will the english monarchy ever be abolished without the revolution? some people i was talking to said some moves in england have been taken in that direction through the democratic process. is this true?
I find the real question is Is there any point in abolishing the monarchy. Theyve been pretty much emasculated nowadays.

[Dimentio]

Is it so important?

[Sadena Meti]

Originally posted by razboz+January 11, 2007 12:35 pm--> (razboz @ January 11, 2007 12:35 pm)
Red October [email protected] 11, 2007 05:26 pm
will the english monarchy ever be abolished without the revolution? some people i was talking to said some moves in england have been taken in that direction through the democratic process. is this true?
I find the real question is Is there any point in abolishing the monarchy. Theyve been pretty much emasculated nowadays. [/b]
Cost savings :)

[ihaterockandroll]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 05:36 pm
Is it so important?
It's symbolic, we are meant to live in a democracy, having a Monarchy means that no matter how hard any citizens of the UK try, we can never get the top job. Ultimate power still resides with an unelected premier, not an elected president.

That is why it's important.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 05:54 pm
It's symbolic,
Well if that's the real issue, then im going to pass on taking action.

We, as a class are under real attack, from real oppressors, the capitalists, who are far less benevolent, far more powerful and far more active than the Monarchy. Royalty really acts as a red herring, that a lot of activists got sucked into 'attacking' in the 80s.

If the monarchy had, or 'exercised' any real power, she would be in direct opposition to her traditional enemies, the capitalists, who undoubtedly would disenfranchise her. Needless to say, they practically already have.

But if you want to assasinate the old hag and the stuck up wankers that make up her parasitic family, I'll buy you a pint when you get out!

[Dimentio]

Originally posted by ihaterockandroll+January 11, 2007 05:54 pm--> (ihaterockandroll @ January 11, 2007 05:54 pm)
[email protected] 11, 2007 05:36 pm
Is it so important?
It's symbolic, we are meant to live in a democracy, having a Monarchy means that no matter how hard any citizens of the UK try, we can never get the top job. Ultimate power still resides with an unelected premier, not an elected president.

That is why it's important. [/b]
Presidentialism is less democratic and more unstable than parliamentarism. Parliamentarism at least gives representation to the opposition, while the president's place could not often be shared.

[Guerrilla22]

The Brits should get rid of the royals, simply because they're all douches, if for no other reason.

[loveme4whoiam]

The Brits should get rid of the royals, simply because they're all douches, if for no other reason.
Agreed - 'It's A Royal Knockout' anyone?

[LSD]

As far as I can tell, the only effect of the Monarchy on my life is having to stare at the Queen's face on my coins instead of some jack-off politican like John A. McDonald or Mackenzie fucking King.

So, frankly, I couldn't care less either way.

And its not like if the Monarchy were abolished the money currently going to it would go to anything remotely useful. They'd probably just turn all the Palaces into tourist attractions (for a fee of course) and give themselves a hardy pay-boost.

I certainly wouldn't mind if the Queen got her fat ass booted out of Buckingham, but I'm realistic renough to recognize it wouldn't do a damned bit of good.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

It makes no real diffrence wether they stay or go right now

[McLeft]

While this may sound a bit stupid, I think that if the monarchy goes, the UK would break up into the constituent countries becoming independent for good even after the "devolution" of their powers by the current UK administration. I'm not sure but I sort of get the feeling that a lot of Scots are anti English (i've read it too, there was a good article on The Economist on this) and as for the Welsh, my feeling is that they feel oppressed and that they have a prince who isn't even Welsh and who according to them isn't representative of Wales. Northern Ireland would probably join the republic, but who knows. Well that's my greatest fear, to see the UK break up, and I say this because the UK was the product of the unification of the Scottish and English crowns and if it were to go that union would become fructured. That's just my view.

However, my suggestion is to further take constitutional powers from the crown, even if they exist in a "theoretic" sense and reduce their role to mere entertainers (for show for the hardcore royalists, little old ladies from the Shires, lol) and of course reduce their salary, coz currently we pay 50p per person for the monarchy. The national anthem should be changed and her face should be removed from our currency too.

[ihaterockandroll]

re: symbolism, the symbolism that the Monarchy stand for is an unprogressive and reactionary one, they shouldn't exist. And to the fact that they have no direct impact on our lives or wield no direct power does not mean that Queenie couldn't wield considerable power if she so chose to (obviously she would be under huge pressure not to, but hypothetically speaking, she can) Queen Victoria was the last Monarch who effectively wielded power but stopped an elected PM for taking office, although she eventually repealed her descision.

There are clearly more pressing matters to be dealt with, but the I'm sure no one who be sad to see some guillotine's in Windsor.

xx

[Keyser]

Well if that's the real issue, then im going to pass on taking action.

We, as a class are under real attack, from real oppressors, the capitalists, who are far less benevolent, far more powerful and far more active than the Monarchy. Royalty really acts as a red herring, that a lot of activists got sucked into 'attacking' in the 80s.

If the monarchy had, or 'exercised' any real power, she would be in direct opposition to her traditional enemies, the capitalists, who undoubtedly would disenfranchise her. Needless to say, they practically already have.

But if you want to assasinate the old hag and the stuck up wankers that make up her parasitic family, I'll buy you a pint when you get out!

Agreed 100%.

The monarchy is symbolic, even if they do have in theory the power to dissolve bourgeios democracy. Our focus should be on the actual and active agents of capitalist oppression and those agents are the politicians, the media, the corporate elite and the security forces (police and military).

Replacing the monarchy with a bourgeios presidential republican system, such as the French or American model would not result in any less oppression for the working class. With regards to the monarchy and it's cost to the taxpayer, don't you think a president would cost the same amount, with his/her bodyguards, palaces, limos, state dinner parties, servents etc...?

By all means let's get rid of the monarchy, but lets get rid of it with the rest, when the revolution does finally happen and we can do some inserrectionary spring cleaning and get rid of the whole rotten corpse of the British state.

I personally find the intense focus on the monarchy by groups like Class War to be not that useful, as the real agencies of capitalist rule should be the focus of our rage.

[Gold Against The Soul]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 04:40 pm
re: symbolism, the symbolism that the Monarchy stand for is an unprogressive and reactionary one, they shouldn't exist. And to the fact that they have no direct impact on our lives or wield no direct power does not mean that Queenie couldn't wield considerable power if she so chose to (obviously she would be under huge pressure not to, but hypothetically speaking, she can) Queen Victoria was the last Monarch who effectively wielded power but stopped an elected PM for taking office, although she eventually repealed her descision.

True of the UK but did she not effectively sack Gough Whitlam as Prime Minister of Australia?

[Gold Against The Soul]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 10:30 pm
as for the Welsh, my feeling is that they feel oppressed and that they have a prince who isn't even Welsh and who according to them isn't representative of Wales.


The Prince of Wales title gets given to the next in line to the throne. So it isn't like the Monarch is going to pick a Welsh person to do the job and 'represent' the Welsh. It is just a title anyway. Not much oppressing can be done with it.

[Janus]

The royalty are still somewhat popular in England, a country that still enjoys good old traditions so I doubt that this will happen anytime in the immediate future. But rather than attack powerless monarchs, why not attack those who still have political control like the Monarch of Bhutan or Brunei?

[EwokUtopia]

There are bigger problems to worry about than the Monarchy. The modern monarchical system isnt based on power, it is a distraction. It is a soap opera of Jingoism. Yes, alot of the British peoples wealth is wasted on a silly little family, but they do this because the monarchy is in its very nature entertainment to the British masses. The Queen is no threat to the people, she is merely a face on coins and tabloids. The real threats (and the real source of exploitation and inequal distribution of wealth) lies in the buisnesspeople who support this system as a diversion of eyes to one powerless pointless family.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Red October [email protected] 11, 2007 05:26 pm
will the english monarchy ever be abolished without the revolution? some people i was talking to said some moves in england have been taken in that direction through the democratic process. is this true?
Comrade,

I"m afraid you're becoming sucked into real politics. Any effort to have a national revolution of any type against oppression must either be delayed our outright condemend. I can provide you with a few links to Luxemborg or someone like that.

Get back to making slogans about workers uniting over purely immediate demands...

Btw, that's satire. Just had to take a shot at the ultraleft. They're as dangerous as a pond of ducks! :lol:

[Red October]

i know the monarchy is fairly inconsequential in modern times, but it would still be a nice gesture if they got chucked out.

[EwokUtopia]

Does anyone know if any member of the royal family has supported or criticized the war in Iraq?

It would be nice to have a princess or prince renounce his claims and become a leftist, it would really fuck with the mindset of british conservatives. But alas, I dream.

[Jazzratt]

They are a waste of time, money and carbon. I see no reason to keep them around any longer.

EwokUtopia: As far as I'm aware one of the things that we pay the parasites for is to have no opinions. At least not publically. This is because every time we let them say something they come out with the stupidest half-formed opinions.

I often wish that one of the younger ones becomes socialist, but that's like hoping for pigs to not only fly but shed perfectly cooked smoke bacon; not least because it presupposes that one of the chinless cretins is capable of that level of thought.

[Andy Bowden]

The British Monarchy DO have real powers which HAVE been used.

The representative of the British Monarchy, the Governor General in Australia disbanded the social-democratic government of Gough Whitlam in Australia for example.

More recently a royal order was used to prevent the islanders of Diego Garcia from ever returning.

Having royal powers essentially means the government can use these powers to do things unilaterally without having to go to a parliament.

Obviously parliaments are usually full of careerists and will 99% of the time do the bidding of whatever the Government wants it to do, at least it has to be debated and raised in public - whereas the use of royal powers to shaft the islanders of Diego Garcia was done with barely a mention anywhere.

If the capitalist class still want to hold on to a monarchy - its for a reason.

[luxemburg89]

I've lived my entire life in england. the monarchy are pointless themselves, so i do understand why some of you say its pointless to get rid of them. But they are symbolic of what england stands for and that's oppression and imperialism - its all part of the english ideology. i say it's important to change what england stands for, if getting rid of the monarchy, which is something i DO agree with, is part of changing that then i fully support it. although whether it WILL happen soon is up for debate. i don't consider myself to have any nationality though, but i do live in the country.

[Janus]

Does anyone know if any member of the royal family has supported or criticized the war in Iraq?
I think Prince Harry is expected to deploy soon to Iraq with his military unit.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 07:26 am
I think Prince Harry is expected to deploy soon to Iraq with his military unit.
Well aint that just a peice of shit. Fucking Nazi in Iraq...man what happened to his cool pothead days??

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by EwokUtopia+January 16, 2007 01:49 am--> (EwokUtopia @ January 16, 2007 01:49 am)
[email protected] 15, 2007 07:26 am
I think Prince Harry is expected to deploy soon to Iraq with his military unit.
Well aint that just a peice of shit. [/b]
Not really, hopefully he'll get a nice fat lump of lead through the fucking dome.

[Guerrilla22]

Originally posted by Jazzratt+January 16, 2007 08:19 pm--> (Jazzratt @ January 16, 2007 08:19 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 01:49 am

[email protected] 15, 2007 07:26 am
I think Prince Harry is expected to deploy soon to Iraq with his military unit.
Well aint that just a peice of shit.
Not really, hopefully he'll get a nice fat lump of lead through the fucking dome. [/b]
Too bad they won't put him anywhere near any real action.

[shadowed by the secret police]

The monarchy should be abolished because of all the media attention that is diverted from important issues. When Diana was alive she was the top news story every day in England. Whether she was screwing the butler or whoever, whether she and Charles were talking, what she was wearing. The monarchy gets people looking the other way while real issues are ignored.