Monarchy vs Republic in the UK

I thought it would be interesting to have a discussion about the Monarchy in the UK and whether they should be replaced by a Republic.

I know that there are people on here with strong views so let’s here them.


I posted this YouGov opinion poll on another thread so apologies if you’ve already seen it. Very interesting though.

1 Like

Monarchy brings in billions of pounds from tourists and derived products. Like them or not, (and I most certainly DO) they are a financial asset


Yes Philip that’s something often raised by royalists. I posted this on another thread recently (apologies again if you’ve already seen it) but I think it fits here to.

yes…and that is without factoring in the tourist aspect and number of jobs that creates…all of which increases tax revenue…


There’s no monarchy in France but yet France still manages to earn millions from tourist revenue…


And The Crown Estates puts into the Treasury 10x what The Civil List costs. I’d rather have a Monarchy than an elected head of state. An elected head of state generally represents one part of the electorate while alienating the others. At least the Monarchy is not political. And an elected head of state would still cost huge amounts of money for security ect. probably more than the Monarchy costs.


Yep - visting many of the places / palaces their murdered monarchy lived…:wink:


How ever can the UK be replaced by a Republic. it is like asking France to become a Monarchy. I would say both ways it is really impossible .i could go on for hours chatting about the Monarchy in anybody has different ideas and we can get the ball rolling.Whos next?

1 Like

Well, with May’s government talking about taking Henry VIII powers for itself can we really afford to have 2 sovereign powers?
What next? throw the pensioners out of their castle on the hill so May for her new parliament?

1 Like

As mentioned elsewhere, I had a bit of an epiphany over the monarchy watching the wedding. As often happens when one is suddenly caught in catharsis, in tears or even rage, for no obvious reason, there’s a period of calm, and sometimes a major insight follows, like a door opening to reveal a clear view of something previously shut away, or hidden.

For me it was an understanding of the symbolic value of the monarch(y), though not to all. And à recognition of the implicit historic contract between monarch and people, illustrated in the way the Queen has conducted herself since she was proclaimed our Queen. Hers has been, I reckon, an immeasurably challenging life, lived sacrificially, the baubles of her status being very small compensation for the limitations on her personal freedom and autonomy to do “as she pleases”. Every minute of almost every day claimed by duty, which she has committed herself to unwaveringly for so long. There is more I could say but others will say it better. And it’s not about money, how much they cost. That is a distraction from their/her value, which can’t be monetarised, as it misses the point IMO.


You after a Knighthood Peter? :rofl:


No, I don’t deserve an honour. I’ve tried to do my best, but I’ve fallen far short of what could have been an honourable life, and I have no excuses.

But I have changed my mind about the institution of monarchy. It has its faults, like the perversity of class, but that is not an inevitable consequence of monarchy, and its remaining traces are being dismantled, by democratic means. The monarchy is playing a part in that, as recent Royal marriages have shown.


In the 21st century the idea that any developed country has a hereditary head of state is frankly absurd BUT in the UK it works and not only that the current crop of ‘royals’ remain popular with a majority of the general public. To revert to a republic purely on idealogical grounds when there’s no real desire for it would be foolish IMO. The cost of maintaining the monarchy is also a massive red herring as any elected head of state would also require a similar level of funding (or even greater) AND they would undoubtedly have enormous powers compared to the Queen who in reality has zero control over the country.


I was always neutral if not skeptical if not downright against the monarchy until Princess Diana…after her untimely death and the controversy surrounding it I have always had a soft spot for her two sons especially Harry as he’s the youngest…I think the “royal family brand” is going through a bit of a relaunch in order to keep it relevant to the younger generation…In terms of “wealth” they don’t even appear to come close to families such as the Rothschilds…having said that then can America be considered a republic when it too is owned by “The Crown”…??? Just like Canada and Australia and all other commonwealth countries including “U.K.”…”Countries” Are corporations…local authorities are corporations…Prime ministers and presidents are just CEOs of corporations that pay taxes to “The Crown” and from there it goes to the Vatican…It’s the oldest trust in existence and currently still stands…There’s already a meme circulating of Meghan looking over her shoulder at the queen as if the Queen is contemplating another car accident…She’s in her early 90s…no doubt her husband has not been the best when it comes to racist remarks and decidedly undiplomatic comments…The embroidery on meghan’s veil could either be considered as further transparency or…

1 Like

One interpretation of monarchy is that they are ‘archetypes’, expressions of ideals we are all prone to, of duty, of ancestral history and its strange power over us, of principles of justice and protection of our human rights embodied in a person who symbolises continuity and à quality of being inherent in the monarch being a being like us, but not like us somehow: not chosen on a popular whim, but whose appointment is somehow left to destiny, in which many people worldwide have an inexplicable but reliable faith.

This may seem a bit obscure and long-winded (no “likes :heart:️” needed to agree please) but I think it’s worth saying. I shall be interested in dissenting opinions, but would prefer them to address my point of view, and rise above cheap shots about how money could be better spent on the homeless, because that belongs somewhere else IMO.

Its a shame after beheading Charlie the first we were the youngest European republic
The amount of money spent (which aint cheap regardless of the above post )on just the security of the extended royal family is enormous
Why are brits mad about a german family they are useless where did there wealth come from not business but poor peoples income

What’s your issue with the Germans, @crakpot? I find them very agreeable people, from whom we have lots to learn. They are generally very well disposed to British people too, in my experience.

I also like Germans and was prepared to defend them being in he British army Nevertheless why are Brits barmy about the royal family and then against any other European migrants

I forgot the brits think they dont work and sponge of benefits

Very fair points, @crakpot, Brits are in general very mixed up about foreign types and need to get out more. When they do they are often quick converts to wider European culture. Living on an island surrounded by a silver sea has made us à bit narrow-minded. But broadly speaking we are very open to the wider world.

1 Like