Queen Elizabeth II surpasses Queen Victoria's long reign

[Rosella]

I'm sorry Mayerling. When I wrote that republicans might be on the move here, I meant in Oz, as Gut has explained.

Even though there are republicans in Britain that would dearly love to see the monarchy abolished, I'm sure!

[Bridewell]

I think one of the cruellest suggestions I've heard is that Charles should stand aside for his son when the time comes. He's spent his entire life waiting in the wings and to deprive him of the throne in, perhaps, his seventies or even eighties would be wrong - especially as his reign will inevitably be of comparatively short duration anyway.

Well done, Your Majesty!

[Rosella]

Well, the monarchy's not a popularity contest, is it? If it were there would have been a few past monarchs who would have never come within spitting distance of the throne!
Yes, at the moment William, Kate and their children and Harry are riding high. They're considered young and interesting and great fun. Might not be that way when they're fifty or so.
It's true there are still Diana fans about who will never forgive the Prince of Wales for the mess of his first marriage. I'm sure that it is driving some of this feeling against Charles.

[Mayerling]

I'm sorry Mayerling. When I wrote that republicans might be on the move here, I meant in Oz, as Gut has explained.

Even though there are republicans in Britain that would dearly love to see the monarchy abolished, I'm sure!

Hi GUT and Rosella,

I had forgotten the upsurge in "Republican" sentiment that occurred in the 1970s in Australia after some incident regarding the Governor-General and the Prime Minister (I believe that was at the base of it). Actually it does seem that Australia will leave sooner or later. Unlike other major chunks of the Commonwealth (technically no Empire since 1931), there are frayed connections from the start down under with the motherland. After all, unlike British North America (Canada, and the U.S. when colonial - except for Georgia), the Royal Government dumped convicts into Australia as a way of ridding them from Britain (to end crime - it really worked, didn't it?). With that as a background most of the historical drama of Australia gradually coming to age is loaded with events like the Eureka Stockade and figures like Ned Kelly who are anti-establishment. Canada does not have that - the British segment clings to the "Mother Country" because of that big province in the center that dares remain French. New Zealand doesn't either. In fact one of it's chief founders, Edward Gibbon Wakefield, had come up with a resettlement plan there (ironically while in prison for abducting an heiress - I'm serious about that) that would push it into a separate background from the Australians - only good middle class people could emigrate to New Zealand (better stock, ya know!). Naturally he forgot one major detail - the Maoris. A bit better organized and prepared for warfare over turf than the poor Aborigines.

I would not be surprised if Australia does op out of the Commonwealth in the next half century or so. It would be so easy.

Jeff

[belinda]

I am a republican and believe that monarchies have had their time. They serve no purpose in this day and age

[Limehouse]

I don't think the republican movement will catch on. The monarchy is such a tourist attraction to the British Isles, and it's historical significance is only possibly shared by the Spanish Bourbons (who currently also have a throne again). All of the other monarchies in Europe are from smaller countries, except (economically) Sweden, and (in terms of physical size) Norway.

Jeff

I am not a republican as such and I really respect our Queen and admire her work ethic but I do not agree that the tourists would not come if we didn't have a monarch. The tradition of monarchy is so entrenched and the British Royals have been so famous (and at times, notorious) that the tourists would still come to see Hampton Court and all the famous Royal palaces and sites, even if we abolished the monarchy. After all, they continue to do so in France.

However, people often overlook the amount of money and business that flows into this country due to the Queen's very hard promoting our country.

She has done a magnificent job and, although she undoubtedly lives in the lap of luxury, she has made a great sacrifice - that of her personal freedom.

Kind regards,

[Limehouse]

I think one of the cruellest suggestions I've heard is that Charles should stand aside for his son when the time comes. He's spent his entire life waiting in the wings and to deprive him of the throne in, perhaps, his seventies or even eighties would be wrong - especially as his reign will inevitably be of comparatively short duration anyway.

Well done, Your Majesty!

I totally agree Bridewell. Why should Charles step aside? He certainly wasn't the first Prince of Wales to commit adultery and in any case, who knows what really went on in that marriage? Was he really entirely to blame? Only he and his sadly departed late wife truly know the answer to that question.

William is no more fit for the role of monarch than his father.

[Pcdunn]

I am a democrat, but I think if Mr. Trump is elected, the US may be heading to a monarchy! Only half-joking, some of his comments are downright scary!

[Rosella]

People threatened half-jokingly that they would leave the U.S. If George W. ever became President. If Trump is still there next Spring and starts winning primaries we should all be afraid, very afraid!

Mayerling, there are many countries in the Commonwealth that are republics. I don't think Australia will leave the Commonwealth if we become a republic. We enjoy winning sporting contests like the Commonwealth Games too much!

Seriously though, republicanism has taken a nosedive of sorts here in the past decade or so. According to polls fewer young Aussies are enthralled by it. Plus there are quite a few hoops to be jumped through to get a Yes vote through via referendum to change our Constitution, necessary for a republic to be formed. Only eight amendments have succeeded since 1901. Australia is very multicultural but there has been a lot of British migration too.

[Ginger]

God Save the Queen!

[Rosella]

We hope the Queen will be saved until July next year which will be her 90th (official) birthday, and Philip's 95th. There are huge celebrations planned.

[Fleetwood Mac]

I don't think the republican movement will catch on. The monarchy is such a tourist attraction to the British Isles, and it's historical significance is only possibly shared by the Spanish Bourbons (who currently also have a throne again). All of the other monarchies in Europe are from smaller countries, except (economically) Sweden, and (in terms of physical size) Norway.

Jeff

There isn't really a Republican movement in England, nor is there much of a pro-Monarchy movement.

Most people don't have an opinion on it one way or the other - I suppose it's a sign that we generally think the system isn't broken.

It's been a long time since we went in for drastic change, and so measured, steady progress is a cultural theme here.

Personally, the reason in me believes we can't possibly ever be democratic with a Monarchy, but then no country in this world is democratic in terms of the ideal that was envisaged during The Enlightenment; the traditionalist in me believes English heritage is worth preserving.

If forced to choose reason would win the day, but we are absolutely nowhere near being forced to choose.

[Mayerling]

There isn't really a Republican movement in England, nor is there much of a pro-Monarchy movement.

Most people don't have an opinion on it one way or the other - I suppose it's a sign that we generally think the system isn't broken.

It's been a long time since we went in for drastic change, and so measured, steady progress is a cultural theme here.

Personally, the reason in me believes we can't possibly ever be democratic with a Monarchy, but then no country in this world is democratic in terms of the ideal that was envisaged during The Enlightenment; the traditionalist in me believes English heritage is worth preserving.

If forced to choose reason would win the day, but we are absolutely nowhere near being forced to choose.

I hope it continues. Being one eighth English (from Birmingham) I have some interest in what goes on there and I find that the monarchy has a historical charm that is hard to match.

All this talk about "monarchy v. republicanism" makes me think of G. B. Shaw's late play (1930) "The Apple Cart". In the midst of a major political crisis (King Magnus can't keep showing the public what he thinks of the political statements he's forced to mouth, so he winks at the crowds and they realize he's letting him know it's a lie), word comes of a secondary threat. The President of the United States (whose name is similar to mine - it's "Bossfield") has had a brainstorm (Magnus glumly states that President Bossfield is known for his "brainstorms"): the U.S. will willingly renounce it's 1783 hard-won independence and rejoin the British Empire, but (of course) as the U.S. is richer than Britain the capital and the royal family must move to Washington, D.C. When the King has a moment of talking to Prime Minister Proteus about this, the Prime Minister states they'll move the capital of the Empire to Cape Town first!!

Jeff

[Robert]

An individual monarch may be popular or unpopular - and we've had some pretty unpopular ones. But if ever a solid and unappeasable majority for republicanism should arise, then the monarchy will have to go (eventually).
The thing is, though, that having a referendum, say every 25 years, would be almost as fatal to the monarchy, even if such referendums produced consistently pro-monarchy results. The monarchy would then be more like a presidency. It's something to do with what Bagehot says, about letting light in on magic. So we have the paradoxical situation where the monarchy is by definition undemocratic, but that people are happy with that, so it's democratic after all.

[Fleetwood Mac]

I am a republican and believe that monarchies have had their time. They serve no purpose in this day and age

I have absolutely no idea why a country thousands of miles away would want to be part of the English monarchy.

It always amazes me. We may have had a connection a hundred years back, but that time is long gone.

Why on earth the Australians keep voting to maintain a connection with our monarchy is beyond me and to be frank it's ludicrous.