The Queen to abdicate?

[Catta]

I think you just answered your own question. Getting a PM's ear and taking a prime leadership role in foreign engagement is a fair bit of political clout for someone with no real qualifications other than being born to the right person.

It is purely in name. She has no political clout. If she tried to do anything or even express herself politically (publicly) then she would have to abdicate. They are obliged by law to stay completely impartial of politics.

[Xanjori]

I think you just answered your own question. Getting a PM's ear and taking a prime leadership role in foreign engagement is a fair bit of political clout for someone with no real qualifications other than being born to the right person.

She probably receives more education into it than 10 people on this forum combined. You seem to be under the impression we don't choose what she does or who she speaks too.

[Deleted]

Right, I can intellectually understand that it's been drilled into people's heads the same way that a loathing of monarchy has been drilled into mine. I just don't really get how it stays in place in a populace that stops and thinks about whether it's just for a couple minutes.

(I can only speak for the monarchy of the UK here, I do not know the extent to which it applies to other countries)

The royal family have no political power. Although officially all governmental power originates from the crown, effectively the queen acts as a rubber stamp on governmental decisions. Although we have no written constitution, it is, as it were, the prime unwritten rule that the crown does not interfere with the running of the country: the government is quite capable of making a balls-up of that by itself. Any such interference would have fairly profound consequences (if it became public, obviously).

The true purpose of the monarchy is a tourist attraction. Given how successful the royal family is at this, the general silliness of the concept of can, usually, be forgiven.

[Wikiy]

Its more like that they do not do anything and can be seen as either a beacon for our culture or as useful tourist magnets. My country has the oldest surviving monarchy - AND flag.

And? That generates personal pride for you? I understand why (since, for example, Croatia was a kingdom even before Denmark), but can you specify an inherently positive thing in this pride?

I could, for example, give you a negative side to being a monarchy, and that's the fact that you're all constitutionally inferior to your king. Your constitution says one person is by birth superior to another.

[Catta]

And? That generates personal pride for you? I understand why, but can you give an inherently positive thing in this pride?

I could, for example, give you a negative side to being a monarchy, and that's the fact that you're all constitutionally inferior to your king. Your constitution says one person is by birth superior to another.

Personally i dont really care but its a thing for many others. Especially with more immigrants coming you see a core around the "traditional" danish-ness forming.

[Verain]

Right, I can intellectually understand that it's been drilled into people's heads the same way that a loathing of monarchy has been drilled into mine. I just don't really get how it stays in place in a populace that stops and thinks about whether it's just for a couple minutes.

It seems ludicrously foreign to me as well, but that's honestly just because it is. I mean, look at how many Europeans come bounding into the "lets revoke the second amendment" threads- that's not part of their upbringing either. It's just a cultural difference.

Anyway, good luck to the Netherlands!

[Catta]

It seems ludicrously foreign to me as well, but that's honestly just because it is. I mean, look at how many Europeans come bounding into the "lets revoke the second amendment" threads- that's not part of their upbringing either. It's just a cultural difference.

Anyway, good luck to the Netherlands!

The british queen is making tons of money for the English and is a brand for them around the world. Why would they get rid of her?

If you say the Queen you immediately think of the british one. The whole first page of this thread was people expecting it to be the british one rather than the netherlandic one.

[Shadowmelded]

I still can't fathom why Europeans haven't taken an "off with their heads" approach to monarchs and reappropriated their possessions to the nations.

Other people have mentioned the revenue they generate for the country so all I'll add is, as a diplomat royal families are usually fairly well received in foreign countries, especially those that lack one of their own. It's nice to have a diplomat whose mere presence in the country will be covered by countless journalists, who can also exert some political pressure all under the guise of a friendly meeting between state heads.

[Wikiy]

Define "superior".

The definition doesn't matter (and I don't understand why you'd want it either way), what matters is that the royal family automatically get stuff no one else in your country could ever get. And it's given to them by the constitution.

Sorry, but I'm a socialist. I find systems that automatically privilege certain people repulsing, and that privilege is written in your constitution.

[Deleted]

lol I was soooo expecting something about Queen Elizabeth II when clicking this thread ^^

Even though it has happened before, I would still imagine it as a big deal. It's an entire country changing monarch.

As was I! Curses. I got all excited. >=I

Odd that the monarchs have been abdicating so frequently in Holland. Any idea why they don't just keep the throne warm until they 'check out'? Do monarchs in the Netherlands have more taxing duties than the Windsors?

[Deleted]

As was I! Curses. I got all excited. >=I

Odd that the monarchs have been abdicating so frequently in Holland. Any idea why they don't just keep the throne warm until they 'check out'? Do monarchs in the Netherlands have more taxing duties than the Windsors?

Why would you get excited about Lizzie abdicating? Surely she is better than that buffoon Charles?

[Stir]

I still can't fathom why Europeans haven't taken an "off with their heads" approach to monarchs and reappropriated their possessions to the nations.

We kind of did. There was this war, with a Spanish despot who controlled much of Western Europe, and the Dutch kind of kicked them out. And then appointed a king of their own.
To create a kingdom was a democratic decision. Ironically, the first king of the Netherlands didn't have that much of a say in it.
Being a kingdom allowed the Netherlands to trade with many more nations, and opened up all sorts of doors. The Dutch kingdom (which it, indeed, hasn't been for very long in Dutch history) has always been democratic, and has always been a republic. Dutch royalty has never had much in terms of political power. They've always had a diplomatic role, first and foremost.

[Deleted]

Why would you get excited about Lizzie abdicating? Surely she is better than that buffoon Charles?

I'd hope it would spark discussion of whether or not we should bother with the monarchy after the old bird inevitably goes the way of the dodo.
Get rid of the monarchs and replace the House of Lords with a democratically elected body, I say. 'God Save The King' just sounds too archaic for us to have Charles follow up Lizzie's reign. The anthem's deflating enough as it is already!

I see the pro-monarchy £££ tourism argument has already come up, but my response is that the palace at Versailles receives an average of 5 million visitors per year and the French lopped Louis XVI's head off centuries ago!

[semaphore]

I think you just answered your own question. Getting a PM's ear and taking a prime leadership role in foreign engagement is a fair bit of political clout for someone with no real qualifications other than being born to the right person.

I think you're attributing far too much power to her. She offers advice. The examples I've heard of are along the lines of: "that dictator giving you grief loves golf, you could try arrange a golf date". It's not taking "a prime leadership role" by any means.

---------- Post added 2013-01-29 at 01:18 AM ----------

As was I! Curses. I got all excited. >=I

Odd that the monarchs have been abdicating so frequently in Holland. Any idea why they don't just keep the throne warm until they 'check out'? Do monarchs in the Netherlands have more taxing duties than the Windsors?

It's their tradition.

[Stir]

I think you're attributing far too much power to her. She offers advice. The examples I've heard of are along the lines of: "that dictator giving you grief loves golf, you could try arrange a golf date". It's not taking "a prime leadership role" by any means.

On top of that, the qualifications are quite good, to be honest. You don't find many politicians with over thirty years of intensive education dedicated to that field specifically. Royals do get that much education on the matters. Politicians get four. If you're insanely lucky; most of them have zero.

[semaphore]

On top of that, the qualifications are quite good, to be honest. You don't find many politicians with over thirty years of intensive education dedicated to that field specifically. Royals do get that much education on the matters. Politicians get four. If you're insanely lucky; most of them have zero.

Though tbh it relies on the sovereign being dedicated to their job as the Queen is. Imagine getting, say, George IV. It's also why I prefer an elective monarchy, possibly with restricted candidacy. Tanistry anyone?

[Deleted]

As a dutch guy i don't really care, a spoiled brat is going out and another spoiled brat is going in.

[Stir]

Though tbh it relies on the sovereign being dedicated to their job as the Queen is. Imagine getting, say, George IV. It's also why I prefer an elective monarchy, possibly with restricted candidacy. Tanistry anyone?

Absolutely true. An elective monarchy would be a bit weird, though; either elect your tyrant, or don't. :P
Elected tyranny with the people's right to depose said tyrant if they're doing an awful job and refuse to quit is actually something I'd personally endorse. With elected council, of course. That's pretty much what the US government has, and I agree with the premise; it would be great if it was more about serving the populace, and less about serving the country. It would be the best of both worlds, so to speak.
Royals aren't trained in politics as such, though. They're trained mostly at diplomacy and warfare. Yups; it's an ancient custom, but the main reason we've got kings is war. Public relations are really a king's thing, so princes must serve in the military, must be deployed in time of war at least once (usually more often). That's going to be interesting as the next in line for the Dutch throne is female. It would be refreshing if she would also serve in the military like her father did.
Anyway, so yeah: Public relations.

Ruling the country is something that is governed by politics, justice and police. Not kings.

[Cairhiin]

Pretty good news, Even though the Queen was a nice lady she deserves some rest now

Gotta agree with this. I've been alive for the entirety of her reign and I've always found her to be an outstanding and very dedicated person. Even during the last harsh year with the Friso accident she continued to her job to the best of her abilities . I am somewhat sad to see her abdicate but she deserves the rest. The news did come as a surprise to me as I always thought she'd go on for some more years. Rumor has it that she didn't want to make the same sad case out of Willem Alexander as is happening to Prince Charles.

Besides Willem Alexander will make a great King, he is closer to the people.

[Catta]

The son of my rich neighbours will also automatically get all their stuff because of the law, is that wrong too?

I'm a socialist too, but I don't have a problem with our monarchy.
That's probably because we got them in a different way.

Most monarchies are "forced" on the nation whereas we "chose" to have a monarchy.

I think most socialists in the countries with monarchs dont mind them because they do nothing. If they started stealing things from stores, assaulted others and the likes i think the attitude towards them would change.