Could The British Monarchy Have Been Abolished After Diana's Death?

Hörnla

arrowiv said:
Also, abolition of monarchy means goodbye tourist dollars! That would send the UK economy in a real tailspin!
Click to expand...

I doubt that. If London were as exciting as.....say.....Birmingham, they could have five Queens sitting there and few tourists coming around.

Take a look at Vienna. If the Habsburg's still sat in the Hofburg, I doubt there would be even more tourists pouring into the city.
 

wd40

In the days after Diana died, crowds outside Buckingham Palace were becoming disgruntled at the Queen's refusal to come down from her holiday in Balmoral to participate in the mourning.

If the Queen had ever been overtly booed in person by a large crowd at that time, it would have spelt the end of the monarchy.

Fortunately (or unfortunately!), Blair prevailed on Her Majesty to come back to London immediately, and the monarchy was saved.
 

Danth

The only time the monachty has been threatened realisticly in the modern day:

King George V and the socialists confrontation after the great war
King Edward VII and the religious fanatics over his choice of wife

Diana was blown out of porpotion
Prince Charles for instance is at the height of his popularity at the moment for instance.
Look at William and Kate their both loved.

So no I dint think you could remove the monarchy from Britain
They tried it once and well, they dug up the grave of the guy that tried it and stuck his head on a spike. And also changed the official records so it looked as if the monachty hadn't been removed.
 

Garrison

Donor
wd40 said:
In the days after Diana died, crowds outside Buckingham Palace were becoming disgruntled at the Queen's refusal to come down from her holiday in Balmoral to participate in the mourning.

If the Queen had ever been overtly booed in person by a large crowd at that time, it would have spelt the end of the monarchy.

Fortunately (or unfortunately!), Blair prevailed on Her Majesty to come back to London immediately, and the monarchy was saved.
Click to expand...

As has been pointed out those crowds weren't exactly representative and the notion that QEII being booed would have ended the monarchy is just bizarre. Even as a republican by inclination I recognize there is no chance of ending the monarchy as long as QEII reigns and as Charles seems to have patched up his image, which did take a battering over the divorce and Diana's death, not to mention William waiting in the wings, the prospects are not exactly bright for republicans.
Given the longevity of the members of that family we probably won't see the back of the house of Windsor this century.
 

Danth

Garrison said:
As has been pointed out those crowds weren't exactly representative and the notion that QEII being booed would have ended the monarchy is just bizarre. Even as a republican by inclination I recognize there is no chance of ending the monarchy as long as QEII reigns and as Charles seems to have patched up his image, which did take a battering over the divorce and Diana's death, not to mention William waiting in the wings, the prospects are not exactly bright for republicans.
Given the longevity of the members of that family we probably won't see the back of the house of Windsor this century.
Click to expand...

Being a monarchist that makes me happy.

While on the subject of republicanism.

During class we had a vote on the monachty and 80% voted in favour of the monachry gaining political power and these were actual smart people voting for this, not some nattionalistic idiot.
Strange how much influence the monachry has over the younger generations now a days.
Never realised before
 

Dathi THorfinnsson

Danth said:
Prince Charles for instance is at the height of his popularity at the moment.
Click to expand...
Not that thats saying much:)

But, true, i would be quite happy now to have him as my king for, say five years, before passing the torch.

It wasnt that long ago that wanted liz to abdicate directly in favour of william.
 

Pikers3

Dathi THorfinnsson said:
Not that thats saying much:)

But, true, i would be quite happy now to have him as my king for, say five years, before passing the torch.

It wasnt that long ago that wanted liz to abdicate directly in favour of william.
Click to expand...

This is all the plan of the monarchy. Basically in the lead up to and now after the Diamond Jubilee, Charles is being put much much more into the public sphere.
His influence is already being felt as Charles wants a smaller royal family with Prince Andrew, Princess Royal etc and their decedents becoming less visible and not having all the privileges that being a royal entails.

Evidence of this is the fact that he has done that weather show and seems to be popping up everywhere at the moment!
I think it is to try and boost his popularity with the public while the Queen is still there so people don't think of him as a leader and on the throne.
The Royal Wedding could also be a trick in this to make the public concentrate on Charles and his children more rather than the Queen.

Once Charles is much more popular I could see the Queen basically withdrawing from all but the most important ceremonial duties while Charles becomes the face of the monarchy, which would give him a solid ground to build on as monarch after Liz passes.

It has probably happened now as Prince Phillip does seem to be on his last legs and the Queen is very old now so I doubt they can keep up all the duties of a British monarch for long.

This couldn't have been done earlier due to the fact that people still cared about Diana vs. Camilla and him not being married to Camilla.
 

arcee

Just out of curiosity-

If the UK becomes a republic, what would it be called? Would it be called the Republic of England, Wales, Scotland and N. Ireland?
 

usertron2020

Donor
Lizzie's place on the throne was never in danger. Realistically, neither was the Monarchy in general. Certainly, the idea that William V would be denied his time on the throne seems almost petty. But were Elizabeth II to live to 105 years of age, perhaps to the point of outliving Charles, I wonder how many people would be deeply upset?

That's not ghoulish, it just means Charles lives to be 82.
 

wd40

Diana dealt a body blow to the House of Windsor, and I wouldn't put it past Andrew to also do so if his daughters aren't 'reinstated'!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ince-Andrew-Royal-divide-role-Princesses.html

Otherwise instead of "The Princes in the Tower"

220px-Princes.jpg




it'll be "The Princesses in the Tower"
eugenie-beatrice_nc.jpg
!
 

thekingsguard

With Elizabeth on the Throne? Never. You'd either need to have future King Charles III be as awful as the prior two, or have the Simpsons have been right about Prince Harry, mentioned in the same breath as Hitler.

Ah. Bloody Harry, he brought back beheading in a big way. :D
 

Hörnla

As an Outsider ( I hail from Germany, just like the windsors ;-) ) I also have the Impression that the monarchy is safe for the foreseeable Future. QE2 is "sacrosanct". Charles (&camilla) are, if Not loved, then accepted. And despite the Loss of hair, William (&kate) seem so popular, that the prospect of them being the Royal couple One Day is already stabilizing. So that brings us, under normal circumstances, well beyond 2050.

My congratulations. I think that a constitutional Monarchy would have been preferable for Germany As well, although Most Bundespräsidenten did/do a really decent Job.
I wouldn't have Said so 15 or 20 Years ago. But Even the US come to a Place where their political mechanisms continually damage the office of the President continually and actually a Division of These functions As in Other countries might Be preferable in the Long Run ( Not necessarily a Monarch, though).

By the Way; nothing is Safe in this Field, but i Wonder how a Break-up of William and Kate would Be handled nowadays Especially After the Diana Experience. A patchworky Royal Family could try to keep her "in the firm" if She remains popular and if Children are involved.
 

theReturner

Hörnla said:
By the Way; nothing is Safe in this Field, but i Wonder how a Break-up of William and Kate would Be handled nowadays Especially After the Diana Experience. A patchworky Royal Family could try to keep her "in the firm" if She remains popular and if Children are involved.
Click to expand...

That's actually an interesting point. People here assume the Monarchy is safe because Will and Kate are popular now but that could change in the future.
 

Grimm Reaper

wd40, Diana did no harm to the royal family and since Andrew's girls remain royal princesses just what would they need to be reinstated as according to that link which somehow imagines Charles would prefer a smaller royal family meaning more work for himself and his sons?
 

Garrison

Donor
Grimm Reaper said:
wd40, Diana did no harm to the royal family and since Andrew's girls remain royal princesses just what would they need to be reinstated as according to that link which somehow imagines Charles would prefer a smaller royal family meaning more work for himself and his sons?
Click to expand...

Unless wd40 is laying the groundwork for a TL they are just indulging in a fantasy that even a UK tabloid wouldn't touch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top