University:
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Course:
PS 140 | Introduction to International Relations
Academic year:

2022
Views:

381

Pages:

1
Author:

timddslx2

The British monarchy: should they go or should they stay? Queen Elizabeth II is 95 years old, so the community is concerned about the future of the country, how the next successor will be accepted by the subjects and what changes will he bring, when the time comes. Brits love talking about the Royal family, they even have their favourite Royals. Nevertheless, there are supporters of the idea of eliminating the monarchy. Is monarchy outdated and irrelevant nowadays, or should we forget about egalitarianism, Royals’ financial support and the feeling of stability and equality it provides for people? Queen is the head of the state it includes all people, despite their race, religion, sexuality and age. When a new head of state is elected, he usually represents the interests of a certain party, might not consider interests of minorities or lead policy that will discriminate them. Whereas monarch represents interests of all his subjects. The British monarchy has shown that it is able to reform itself and adapt to modern times. In 1992 Queen Elizabeth II started paying taxes (as well as prince Charles, who was also allowed to marry a divorced woman). She voluntarily pays a sum equivalent to income tax on her private income and income from the Privy Purse, that is not used for official purposes. It is known that Royal weddings cost a lot of money, so, if earlier they were considered private event, now they are translated and can be watched by public. They donate a great sum of money to charity organizations. Thereby the Royal family is not only spending money, but giving money to the people. Constitutional monarchy offers more stability and security than other forms of government. Elected and appointed officials change, but queen remains for life. In times of emergency, such as war or pandemic, these governments generally pull together and remain stable. A king or queen provides a continual link to the past and elected or appointed officials to know they have to answer the monarch. The separation of government between the monarch and the elected representatives offers a double layer of stability. People have the ability to vote out representatives that they feel are not meeting their best interests. At the same time, there is still consistency within the structure of the government so that forward progress can be made. To conclude with, monarchy in the UK is a symbol of stability and security, it is an assurer of representing public’s interests, which is, certainly, vitally important to Queen’s subjects. Monarchy is interested in making life of all of its subjects better, not leading policy of some party or making fortune (as leaders in republics can be). Time shows monarchy is doing great in adjusting to modernity, so before making some decisions on abolishment of the monarchy in the UK, I reckon, Britain should meet the next ruler.