Image: Hulki Okan Tabak, Unsplash
Over the years, many people (mostly on the left) across Britain have yearned for us to become a Republic. Though the United Kingdom is often regarded as one of the most successful democracies in the world, and without an elected President, there are those who wish to go one step ahead and elect their leaders – but what’s the need, if at all?
A balanced system
Our current system, being a Constitutional Monarchy, gives a perfect balance and keeps our democracy in check. We essentially have a powerless, yet all-powerful ruler, which has worked for many, many years. While those who’ve abolished their monarchies have swung to the extremes, Britain has kept steady. We didn’t have to suffer under totalitarian regimes, be it fascist or communist. People can elect terrible leaders who do not have their best interests at heart. A monarch, as someone who perhaps see’s the bigger picture and the long-term game, would want to make sure the system doesn’t go totally out of whack, as it would threaten their power, but also wreck the country they love.
Also an elected parliament keeps the monarchy in check – if a monarch steps out of line as Edward VIII did in 1936, parliament will step up and ensure balance and peace is restored.
Also just a small note to those of the left, the House of Lords has recently been more left-wing than the elected House of Commons. From the UK’s departure of the EU, to the tangling with the Rwanda Bill, the unelected House of Lords have been there to ensure the Conservatives don’t get their way that easily. If we had an elected Senate, one could doubt if they would be as challenging to the Conservatives as the unelected House of Lords have been.
Nothing will change
In a Republic, you will still have a wealthy person living in a palace, with scandal after scandal hitting them and embarrassing the nation. And you have to elect the useless individual every four years. Yes, it’s easy to say “well we’ll cut their salaries and make them live in a house” but then you’re essentially missing the point – they’ll use their position to potentially gain influence and make loads of money after their term in office anyway, like many Prime Minister’s currently do now. They, sadly, will be more of a burden on society than any Royal Family. Just look at France and the United States!
Something to unite behind
The British Monarchy does give people in our nation a more defined national identity. Any royal event always unites the nation, for we are a nation of not just citizen, but subjects to a crown, and yes some might be more equal than others, but which system offers total equality? Again, it is easy to point to our republic neighbours across the English Channel or to the U.S. across. the pond.
Reform is still an option
The option of reforming our system so it’s more fair is still there. The royals have been reforming already. Modern attitudes mean no one cares if a royal marries a divorcee, they now pay income-tax, and there is still options of giving the royals less money or seizing some of their extra palaces (or to be diplomatic, allowing them to ‘bestow’ a palace or two to the nation as a new museum). We should, and can see them for what they are – humans who won the birth lottery. They’re just people, they aren’t more valuable than you, but it’s better having them than countless Presidents. That continuation is also key, it’s what Elizabeth II gave us, and hopefully it’ll be what Charles II will give.
Conclusion: God save the King!
Having a monarch in the 21st century can be a challenge, but having an elected President will be a bigger headache, and possibly a total nightmare. Let’s keep our lovely Constitutional Monarchy, for it helps us keep safe and stable.
by Berk Bektas
One Nation Forum 