AHC: Make Britain Into A Republic During the 20th Century

Greenville

Banned
The challenge is to at some point between the year 1900 and 2000 to cause Great Britain to dissolve the monarchy and become a full-fledged republic government.
 
Britain agrees to terms in June 1940 and the eventual fallout includes a more German friendly 'national Socialist' government setup - which upon Germany's ultimate and eventual defeat by a US Backed Russa is torn down and all of the 'establishment' that supported that government is also torn down and by the 50s Britain has become a republic.

MMMm maybe......
 
Earlier death of QEII in the late 1970s. Charles becomes King and his personal life (divorcing the popular Diana, picking ugly Camilla as his next partner, death of Diana) makes him incredibly unpopular. After the death of Diana, emotions are running high and opportunitist Tony Blair calls a referendum on the status of the monarchy. Britain votes to become a republic.
 
God knows why Diana was popular. Camilla is a far more professional Royal and has aged better than her peers (no pun intended). The issue would have never happened if 'Madge' hadn't decided that Charles couldn't pick a divorcing partner. He should have stuck to his guns and challenged the Establishment to a show down. I can't see any Labour PM calling a referendum that sought to exclude divorced people; especially in the 1980's.

The simplest, most likely and least dramatic POD is a more energetically socialist Labour government abolishing the House of Lords and Monarchy. It certainly wouldn't then be His Imperious Highness Blair as he sought to eradicate socialism from the Labour Party.

Someone once wrote an amusing ATL where the Labour PM pushed through a change to a Republic via Parliament and then all of the Armed Forces refused to change their oath and attestations from one to the Queen to one to the 'President' and thus effectively resigned en masse. The PM then demanded that they all be arrested and charged with mutiny but the Police then resigned. He then demanded that the Police be arrested for effectively striking in contravention to their contracts but the Judges and Magistrates all resigned too and the Civil Service announced a strike in support so he was left with no way to enact anything. Charles raised the Queen's standard at Oxford and a massed loyal demonstration marched to London and physically ejected the PM and MPs from the House and ran a referendum himself. The entire cabinet were charged and found guilty of High Treason under the Treason Act of 1945 and exiled to the Falkland Islands for life. There is probably a book in there somewhere. I felt sorry for the Falkland Islanders.
 
During WW II the royal family moved to Canada and are seen to enjoy a luxurious and indulgent lifestyle while the average Britain endures bombings, rationing and other sacrifices.
Then in the General Elections of 1945 Labour wins on a platform that says that a new Britain does not need royalty to be Great.
 
Then in the General Elections of 1945 Labour wins on a platform that says that a new Britain does not need royalty to be Great.
The problem is that it would take an awful lot to get Labour, or any other major party for that matter, to adopt a Republican platform without first having some major constitutional crisis where the monarch intervenes in politics to a degree that is blatantly unacceptable, and extremely unlikely. Attlee would never have called for a Republic whilst he were leader, for one thing, because he was a firm monarchist, even calling the 1951 election early so that it could fit in with the Kings schedule, when it might have cost Labour victory.

Not only that, but even if Labour had a leadership that is inclined toward Republicanism (as it does now, actually) they likely wouldn't pursue getting rid of the monarchy, because it is too much hassle over an institution which is not terribly powerful, when they have bigger fish to fry. You'd need the monarchy to become intensely politicised, as in Spain for instance, so that it came to be seen as an obstacle to progress by a large portion of the electorate, not just an undesirable irrelevance, before anyone thought it worth getting rid of.
 
Edward VIII refuses to abdicate over Wallis leading to some incredibly nasty battles over his kingship, marriage, and views. George is bullied by Edward to refuse the throne should Parliament move to remove Edward. When the Nazis come a'bombing in 1940, Edward shows his sympathy for Germany and jabs Parliament for inciting Hitler by joining with the French in a Continental affair throwing lives away over Poland. His rows with Churchill become legendary affecting morale and when Atlee becomes PM simply abolishes the office after a decade of Edward's malicious reign.
 
the usa doesn't enter ww1, the germans break through western front and knock out france and capture and kill large numbers of empire soldiers.

the versailles peace conference inflicts harsh terms financially on british empire which it can't afford and limits on royal navy. Returning soldiers go home to a post war depression and alongside break away of dominions who blamed uk for loss of soldiers, British cannot afford to run the british empire and struggle due to navy limitations to put down rebellions that occur with resupply issues.

By 1929, unemployment is 25% and crippling austerity brings the government down producing not a labour government but a hard left who blames the british elite for the collapse of the empire and the huge loss of soldiers in ww1. The armed forces are shattered by ww1, especially the army and ex soldiers flock to the new left wing party.

A failed coup by a royalist military group fails and the counter putsch brings about a republic
 
As JDrakeify says, the British Monarchy has negligible power and directly and indirectly funds itself with an overall profit to the nation so the issue is so trivial to bother with. Many strong left wing members of the Labour Party have commented that you would end up spending nearly as much on some politically tricky president figurehead without getting a heritage dividend.

Does the OP think that it would make a difference to Britain?
 
Pros of the Monarchy:
They are apolitical all the colours of the political world can support them.
They are relatively cheap a President would need all sorts of shiny toys every time he/she is elected, the Queen is still using her greatgreatgreat grandfathers cutlery.
We get to have a big wedding or Jubilee every few years which means a Bank Holiday and a street party.
It annoys foreigners.

Cons of the Monarchy:
For political reasons the govt of the day sometimes invites repulsive foreign politicians for a state visit and the Queen has to be polite even when she wants to vomit on them.
Some of the members of the Royal family have an unhealthy obsession with killing wildlife.

Harry for King he would throw the biggest party ever the whole country would be drunk for a week and we would have the hottest Queen ever, all hail Queen Meghan Markle.
 
The government over reacts to the General strike and has the army open fire on striking dockers. The violence spreads and troops begin to side with the strikers leading to battles with troops loyal to the government. This sparks a full scale revolution leading to the establishment of a British Peoples Republic.
 
Pros of the Monarchy:
They are apolitical all the colours of the political world can support them.
They are relatively cheap a President would need all sorts of shiny toys every time he/she is elected, the Queen is still using her greatgreatgreat grandfathers cutlery.
We get to have a big wedding or Jubilee every few years which means a Bank Holiday and a street party.
It annoys foreigners.

Cons of the Monarchy:
For political reasons the govt of the day sometimes invites repulsive foreign politicians for a state visit and the Queen has to be polite even when she wants to vomit on them.
Some of the members of the Royal family have an unhealthy obsession with killing wildlife.

Harry for King he would throw the biggest party ever the whole country would be drunk for a week and we would have the hottest Queen ever, all hail Queen Meghan Markle.


I would LOVE Prince Harry to be the King. I always said he'd turn the whole country into a stag party! :DDD
 
I can only think of one way, and it involves a successful sea mammal, a last stand and a revolution. Not very likely to happen.

God knows why Diana was popular. Camilla is a far more professional Royal and has aged better than her peers (no pun intended). The issue would have never happened if 'Madge' hadn't decided that Charles couldn't pick a divorcing partner. He should have stuck to his guns and challenged the Establishment to a show down. I can't see any Labour PM calling a referendum that sought to exclude divorced people; especially in the 1980's.

The simplest, most likely and least dramatic POD is a more energetically socialist Labour government abolishing the House of Lords and Monarchy. It certainly wouldn't then be His Imperious Highness Blair as he sought to eradicate socialism from the Labour Party.

Someone once wrote an amusing ATL where the Labour PM pushed through a change to a Republic via Parliament and then all of the Armed Forces refused to change their oath and attestations from one to the Queen to one to the 'President' and thus effectively resigned en masse. The PM then demanded that they all be arrested and charged with mutiny but the Police then resigned. He then demanded that the Police be arrested for effectively striking in contravention to their contracts but the Judges and Magistrates all resigned too and the Civil Service announced a strike in support so he was left with no way to enact anything. Charles raised the Queen's standard at Oxford and a massed loyal demonstration marched to London and physically ejected the PM and MPs from the House and ran a referendum himself. The entire cabinet were charged and found guilty of High Treason under the Treason Act of 1945 and exiled to the Falkland Islands for life. There is probably a book in there somewhere. I felt sorry for the Falkland Islanders.
Oddly, I think this is the most likely ending to a 20th century British Republic.
 
URGB.jpg
It started when Gusty Spence was killed before he could set up the UVF and The UDA was too weak in order to fight the I.R.A This lead to a I.R.A victory when British soldiers were evacuated from Belfast Harbour. The real and provisional I.R.A made a joint government in the north in order to join the republic. But many I.R.A members hated the very existence of the union. So in secret Many I.R.A members launched terrorists attacks against the UK. Because of this. The public demand the British government to stop the I.R.A but the UK can not. Over the next following years the UK fell to anarchy and the monarchy fled to Canada and from the ashes Came THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF GREAT BRITAIN
 
Last edited:
Two possibilities:

  • George V makes some critical mistakes - he never changes his family name to Windsor, and gives Nicholas II asylum after the February Revolution. Make the 1917-1920 period more touch-and-go in terms of staving off revolution, and it's conceivable that the British Establishment might have thrown George and his family under the bus.
  • Edward VIII not only refuses to abdicate in 1936, but actually tries to use military force to keep himself on the throne.
 
Two possibilities:

  • George V makes some critical mistakes - he never changes his family name to Windsor, and gives Nicholas II asylum after the February Revolution. Make the 1917-1920 period more touch-and-go in terms of staving off revolution, and it's conceivable that the British Establishment might have thrown George and his family under the bus.
  • Edward VIII not only refuses to abdicate in 1936, but actually tries to use military force to keep himself on the throne.

I have doubts either of those scenarios would play out that way without other changes. For the first, you'd have to ratchet up anti-German sympathies to almost an unthinking, reflexive level for Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to matter too much, and higher British Socialist sympathies for Nicholas II asylum to matter that much. In the context of the war or just after it, British sympathy would've been largely for the Imperial government over the Bolsheviks who'd just undermined their war ally.

For the second you'd need to have those in parliamentary office who had it in for the Monarchy as an institution. While during the abdication crisis Ireland removed the Crown from its constitution, when a bill was put forward in Britain to use the crisis as a justification for establishing a republic it was defeated 403-5. So I doubt that this is a goer without as you suggested some sort of external abuse of power. But even then, the military would patently ignore any attempt by the King to use them against the government and I believe that the majority of parliamentarians would see the monarchy as a post as a useful unifying figure, especially in the international turbulence of the 1930s. That is advocate replacing the monarch not removing the monarchy.

The surest way I can see a British republic is if successive monarchs become ardently partisan critics of the government and that any attempt to silence them is unsuccessful, with popular support for the monarchy tanking and leading to eventual removal of the Crown.

Other than this the only other avenue I can see is a foreign imposed republic, because any other situation would have significant enough political turmoil that the monarchy would have a use as a thread of poltical stability or continuity.
 

James G

Gone Fishin'
View attachment 330132
It started when Gusty Spence was killed before he could set up the UVF and The UDA was too weak in order to fight the R.I.A. This lead to a R.I.A victory when British soldiers were evacuated from Belfast Harbour. The real and provisional R.I.A made a joint government in the north in order to join the republic. But many R.I.A members hated the very existence of the union. So in secret Many R.I.A members launched terrorists attacks against the UK. Because of this. The public demand the British government to stop the R.I.A but the UK can not. Over the next following years the UK fell to anarchy and the monarchy fled to Canada and from the ashes Came THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF GREAT BRITAIN

All hail the great RIA against them IRA imposters!
 
Top