A constitutional monarchy is a dreadful anachronism which Britain could do without?
A constitutional monarchy is a dreadful anachronism which Britain could do without?
Royalists versus republicans; It is an age old debate and one that perhaps will never be solved, however I will attempt to untangle the arguments and make my own mind up. Many say that the monarchy is outdated and it is true to say that the world into which the Queen Mother was born did not have aeroplanes, computers or nuclear missiles. In the 100 years of her life, there have been two world wars and The British Empire, which once ruled the world, has now been reduced to a few islands in the Pacific and the Caribbean. So surely, some might say, because of all the changes the monarchy is now an outdated system that we no longer want nor need. However, through this turmoil, our monarchy has survived; and surely this is testimony to the staying power and the hard work of the sovereigns and if they have lasted through all of these changes then surely they will last for many more during the centuries ahead.
During the dark ages there was a growing society which needed to be kept in its place and this allowed for the development of the legend of the “divine right” of Kings, expressed no better then in Shakespeare’s Richard II fervent believe of his right to power at one point describing himself as, “this deputy elected by the Lord” (III:ii:57). This was the easy idea that a king or queen's rule was blessed by god. And certainly this thought had the bonus of offering some protection for the rulers from the god-fearing masses. This fable lasted until the late 17th century by which time the budding nobility and land owning gentry were affirming their power through a developing parliament. Indeed after the civil war there was a time when the new republic lasted without the rule of kings. And so surely now we as no longer believe in this strange notion of divine right we can abolish the monarchy without fearing what will happen, once we kept them through fear of god and so now we can abolish them as this fear is no longer there. But perhaps lest fear them, we have become dependent on them. What would we do at all our national ceremonies without the queen to stand there leading proceedings, republicans would say that Tony Blair could do it, but he has an agenda, and that to me is what is so good about the queen. Unlike the prime minister she never really has an opinion, and so when you see her congratulating soldiers you believe that she genuinely means it and isn’t just there for the press. Tony Blair was only elected by a minority of the British people, the Queen has no short-term, political axe to grind and is concerned only with Britain and the Commonwealth's long term interests.
