Why do Europeans (and Australia, Canada, Japan, etc.) support monarchism?

[Tradewind]

i am canadian and i would like to see the monarchy gone out of this country. but i don't think its going to happen in my lifetime. unfortunately many people here seem to think that since since we are inches away from being a cultural satellite of america, we need to save ourselves by being a cultural satellite of britain instead. yay.

Rick Mercer is your vehicle for this statement? Really?

[Deleted]

Swedish. Our royal family are nothing but spokesfigures for a country in a positive light. What's wrong about that?

Most monarchies doesn't run their specific countries any more.

[noobadrood]

Im spanish, and while our royal family ashames us, it's probably the same as it would be with one elected (spanish, after all) president of the republic. And way cheaper.

[Acidbaron]

I'm Belgian and i think we might be the exception to the rule but we are voting things into place to reduce all the monarchy power and funds they receive, a large part of the his country is not in favor of having a Royal House although it's more complicated than that.

[Ettan]

Funny post monarchism and republicanism lol.
I hope you understand that the monarchs are there purely for ceremonial reasons.

I don't support either republican or parliamentarian rule.
I support democracy, (the people rule the people). Not what we today call democracy, the real meaning of democracy.
What you do in today's "democracies" is vote for different dictators once every 2-4 years.
In the current system we have democracy for one day (election day) the rest of the 2-4 years we live in a dictatorship.

There is only three ways to achieve a system where you have true democracy and the people actually have the power.
Either a system in the form of a lottery election (much like jury duty, you have the duty to serve).
Or a pure absolute democracy where everything is voted upon (a system without elected officials), slow for big nations yet doable.
The last one is much like our current system only the elected officials are bound by law to follow their voters slavishly and completely disregard their own opinions.

[Deleted]

they are just traditions,they mean nothing

[Syrco]

I'm very happy with our monarky, not that I'm very into politics and following everything which happens and what they do. But I don't see a reason to change what we've had for thousand years.

[Wildtree]

Good number, thumbs up!

Ash.......... I don't want to rain on your parade, but in a way I just have to...
What you are doing is comparing numbers, while at the same time limiting the reasoning for the numbers. You claim - if I read that correct - that the royal house rather results in a revenue loss in England. And you conclude from the tourism statistics.. Well, if we get into tourism, then we need to look at more aspects....
Number one aspect for tourism - the weather.... UK is (compared to the continent) a wet zone.... This is a draw back, a hindering. Why would I go to England, when my vacation days are rained out (see first sentence)? The weather costs the Brits tourists..
Number two aspect - geography.. It's a damn island. I can drive almost everywhere easily in Europe. But when it comes to England, it's quite a mission. It's not convenient. The most convenient way is via air plane. And that has setbacks.. SO, again.... The geographical situation costs England tourists.
On the other hand now we got France. France has Mediterranean climate to offer in the south. Has at the same time a beautiful Atlantic coast with rather mild climate. It is surrounded by 8 neighbor countries (6 if we exclude Monaco and Liechtenstein). It's easy to access via car. It can benefit from transit tourism, by enjoying the benefit of having those whose destinations are actually Spain and Portugal incorporating France for a day or two sight seeing pit stops. All in all, France's tourism mounts up from aspects of all sorts that aren't available to the Brits. Gotta count such things too, ya know

---------- Post added 2013-04-20 at 06:26 AM ----------

It would also finally give us someone to represent our country. The head of the federal council has pretty much zero representational value.

Switzerland doesn't need a representative. It's amongst those few countries that represent itself best as a whole.
You can, and should be proud of that.

[Deleted]

Like for example: in Germany Adolf hitlers party got voted at election, and the president hindenburg hat no choice but to accept the vote and make him Prime minister.
If the same thing would have happened in GB, the monarch could have said "wtf no, you retarded creep are not becoming prime minister, no way".

So she goes against the wishes of the people? Nice to hear. I thought the government was meant to do what the people want, not the people are meant to do what the government wants.