Republicans will growl but there’s not been a time for ages where a constitutional monarchy looks relatively good as an option.
Despite all the things said about Kate, this couple are generally liked by quite a few in this country and many abroad. And the Danish young royals are also well regarded, to the point that the bushfire victims were lifted by their presence:
Not being a genuine royalist, nevertheless I’d still say, if they’re a good royal couple, they do so much to bind a nation together. There’d be many who, at a minimum, would not mind these as the pomp and circumstance figureheads, even as a conservative reviewer of the doings of a Westminster or Capitol Hill.
The trick, of course, is that they need to be good. Few would like to have Charles and Camilla and there is that pesky little matter of the Belgian aristocracy and the lizardry of the black nobility, the Berlusconi excesses etc. No one wants that in charge of them. Plus the current royals here are Welfs in origin and Welfs are the evil muvvers behind the later Templar corruption and have a different master to their purported leader.
All that’s so and I’m not turning my back on democracy – we need to have a say and have it now but I am suggesting that a royal family with, say, a Wills or Frederik could act as a foil where the Lords has been decimated by the lowlifes in the Commons, e.g. Blair, Brown, Cameron, Clegg and shudder – the soon to be Millipede.
Those people are utter ignoramuses. You might say the royals are perpetuating the elite but I’d argue they’re perpetuating at least some sort of professionalism, they have grace and style, they know how to behave [leaving aside Charles's generation] and I’d vastly prefer to see them at the helm than the clowns up there in Westminster now.
A commenter said the other day that the idea of being subject to a Citizens’ Committee or a Street Committee was not a prospect to relish and that’s right. The idea of the people two doors from me having a say in my life gives me the shudders.
But royals, being that step removed from the everyday, actually give room to move for most of us, as distinct from the interfering politicians who want to rule every aspect of our lives via the treason of handing over to a foreign communist [or communitarian, same thing] power.
If it’s within constitutionality and their role is a revising one, an overseeing, then I’d love the excesses of the clowns who supposedly lead us to be held in check. But a monarch who is a Henry VIII or at the other end, a rubber stamp like QEII is useless for the nation.
The critical word here is “benign”, caring. Readers would immediately point out, given the bottom line with the royals, an elite, that their prime directive is to shore up their power as an elite. Yes but if they act for the nation in so doing and given that there will always be an elite, despite republican ideals, then best a reasonable one which makes life possible.
Every time you think the royals should be disbanded, think of a nation where the highest authority is Barosso, Cameron, Blair, Clegg, Cameron and the “women” – Harman, May, Ashton et al. Think you get my drift.