I mean, just declare a republic ffs.

    • Knuschberkeks@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      it’s difficult to calculate, but if you factor in the amount of tourism money the british monarchy generates it’s probably a net profit.

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        1 day ago

        Still not convinced that the tourists wouldn’t come anymore if you depower the monarchs and keep the palaces etc. as state-owned tourist attractions, TBH.

        • Z3k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 day ago

          Didn’t you hear all of the old palaces on France have had zero visitors since they packed away the guillotines

          Just in case it’s. Ot obvious /s

        • MudMan@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          I think the “it drives tourism” angle is extremely disingenuous and really doesn’t play. Certainly not for the other constitutional monarchies.

          I also think the cost argument itself is pretty disingenuous, though. It’s not like an elected head of state is free. Especially not if you factor in the cost of running elections and campaigns for the position.

          Both things ultimately go to the same point: figurehead is a figurehead. If having a figurehead shuts down traditionalist bullcrap elsewhere I am more willing to make concessions there than on actual policy. You want your mid-skill diplomats to be elected by having sex with each other? Weird kink, but there are higher priorities and it’s a good a reason as any to have a chauvinistic parade every so often. Which is to say not very, but again, you do you.

          Chew toys.

          • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            24 hours ago

            You don’t need a popular election to elect a state figurehead, Germany just has it done by existing parliaments. And figureheads who aren’t monarchs don’t usually have vast landholdings like most monarchs do.

            • MudMan@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              21 hours ago

              I don’t know about “most monarchs”. This wole thread is fairly anglocentric, it seems. It makes sense for the holdings of the crown to be public property. That’s a more than reasonable middle ground, especially if the royal family is on a salary.

              German’s anomaly aside, Presidents tend to have at least some political power, rather than be just a figurehead. I would question the value of an entirely ceremonial head of state who is not a monarch. Why not get rid of the role entirely at that point, if you’re going to keep a fully parliamentarian system with executive power consolidated in a PM? I mean, if you’re planning to have an entirely useless position why take the chew toy away from the dogs? At least keep them entertained.