[Wr8dIAUk]

I'd immagine you more of a Tournament-of-Roses Parade kind a guy.

Flower power?

I think not, therefore I am not.

[7UENf0w7]

Ironic that it is the UK, and not France, that maintains the silly anachronism of a royal family. England placed restrictions on its monarchy hundreds of years before the French lopped off the head of Louis XVI, and the immediate result of that was another absolute ruler.

Besides G.Britain, Belgium, Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Spain, Denmark are all Kingdoms. (Their actual names are "The Kingdom of Sweden", "the Kingdom of Belgium" etc.)

Please Fabrizio. No one gives a rat's ass about Belgium's King Albert (is that where that joke started?), or homogeneous Norway. The UK is four countries, its royal family is well known internationally, and it projects itself as an international center.

Maybe this thread should be referenced with this one. I remember in some other thread you stated something to the effect that the US had gone through a long period of racial turmoil, but Europe was relatively new to diversity.

Well, time to jumpstart into the 21st century, as MTG said:

All of the financial issues aside, it's the very concept of "royalty" that's repulsive and creepy...the idea of "royal blood" in this modern age. I think it contradicts enlightened values and sends the wrong message, that some are born better than others- deserving of special honors and privileges merely by virtue of "lineage".

"Extreme pomp" is also very asthetically beautiful. And the European Monarchies do it so well.

Yes, but what is it they're doing so well? What does a young Brit, who's parents emigrated from Egypt, think when he sees Liz and the rest of the Windsors - that no matter what, he'll never own the country?

Time to put Albert back in the can, and the whole lot on a museum shelf.

[Gakeincidoniac]

While your points may be valid Zippy, you're looking at this from an American perspective so its not surprising that you are not a fan.

The people in these countries support their monarchies, so they will stay until opinion changes.

[osteoftex]

My perspective has less to do with being an American, and more to do with not being a European.

[lakraboob]

Or just being from a republic and one that has never had a monarchy. I do understand all the points put across against monarchies but I just see more positives for the country.

[Daruhuw]

My English friends are split evenly in supporting or despising the royals. My conservative friends support them, and the liberals do not.

I like them. Prince Charles, and William and Harry, support good causes.

Personally, after Prince William marries Kate Middleton, I think that she should run the country. In fact, I'd like for her to run America too after Obama's second term.

[Michaelnewerb]

I read with amusement one reader's comment on the Guardian website that Harry would be a good candidate for the Met.

[Kamendoriks]

Or just being from a republic and one that has never had a monarchy.

Right, because the US Eastern States were never English colonies right? Is there something that wrong with the education system in England that you would say that?

No written constitution, no real Bill of Rights, not even a decent FOI system. Its ironic that the coming of the EU overlords has meant an injection of rights into England that never before existed.

The only benefit the system has is that it is a safety valve in times of dramatic political crisis, such as the advent of a brutal nazi dictator. Under a quite narrow view of her powers, never really exercised, the Queen could then try to remove such a government. I tend to think the people would do that themselves were there such a problem.

[BoomBully]

Personally, after Prince William marries Kate Middleton, I think that she should run the country. In fact, I'd like for her to run America too after Obama's second term.

What, into the ground? I think after Percival's effort at Singapore nobody has much faith in your leaders being able to run anything, except a POIE and SORCE shop at a soccer match.

[EmpaccalGah]

Right, because the US Eastern States were never English colonies right? Is there something that wrong with the education system in England that you would say that?

Most people here have been discussing this in a civil manner, cant you do the same?

I was in mind of the times when the country was governed on its own shores, ie pre-colonial and post revolution. There was no 'american' home grown monarchy, just the imported version.