I think the vast majority of people appreciate what the queen has done for the country and when the time comes it will be a sad period indeed. However she will be a very hard act to follow and I think some rethinking from the institution might be needed in order to survive long term.
What actually has she done?
Start with the Commonwealth.
54 countries and 2.4 billion people who look upon the Queen as a solid, unshakable and honest figurehead.
The Commonwealth is a remarkable international organisation, spanning every geographical region, religion and culture. It exists to foster international co-operation and trade links between people all over the world. It is a voluntary association of independent countries, almost all of which were formerly under British rule.
The Queen dedicated her life to the Commonwealth on her 21st birthday in a remarkable speech from South Africa. She has never wavered from those words you can read them here.
I was born a few months after she was crowned, she’s been a constant throughout my life, she started of a young naive girl, almost lost in her world, she took advice some good, some bad, she learnt and matured until she got to where she is now, a respected leader of a nation that is losing its standing in the world. To me she has changed the monarchy’s role she overseen modernisation of it, done away with a lot of the hangers on. She’s made mistakes but who amongst us who got a family have never made mistakes in way we bring up our families and how we react to our surrounding family members. I think if I would also put the commonwealth high up on any list of her achievements, how she has kept it together and increase its power within the word, whilst decreasing her and Britain’s influences, this will probably be a controversial statement, but it what I think, so hopefully I won’t be asked to defend it. When the day comes I for one will be sad, no doubt a tear or two will fall. Am I royalist, I don’t think so, do I respect her reign, then yes I do.
So she’s gained my upmost respect, it’s what’s follows on that concerns me, I can’t stand Charlie boy but that’s probably that throughout my life me and him were a similar age and I saw the spoilt brat in the paper and thought you lucky / unlucky git (this exclude everything to do with the prices trust which is a brilliant organisation). His or his sons for the obvious reasons they would be a terrible influence. So I will want the impossible that won’t happen if and when the unthinkable occurs then I would like to see one of the grandchildren take the oath and have them on the throne for a similar period, so they can continue the modernisation of the monarchy and the repositioning of Britain in the world. and bring into the 21st century, they got a lot of work to do.
Regardless of what people think of the Monarchy, she is 95 year old woman who deserves the utmost respect. I doubt there are many people on this forum who know anything other than her as the Queen, given that she's coming up to 70 years since her coronation fairly soon.
One thing i would say is that i fully expect apathy towards the monarch to increase if Charles takes over, so i'd hope he abdicates and gives it to William.
I'm not a monarchist but I have a huge respect for her as a person and she has great dignity.
100% this. Through watching the Crown and then researching some of the stories/issues on it, including the constraints and remit of her role, I have the utmost respect for her and the way she has carried out her job.
I think the vast majority of people appreciate what the queen has done for the country and when the time comes it will be a sad period indeed. However she will be a very hard act to follow and I think some rethinking from the institution might be needed in order to survive long term.
I think the vast majority of people appreciate what the queen has done for the country and when the time comes it will be a sad period indeed. However she will be a very hard act to follow and I think some rethinking from the institution might be needed in order to survive long term.
What actually has she done?
A new low point.
Maybe, but what has she actually done?
Well to pose another question - what are you expecting to be doing at the age of 95?
No drifting in to retirement like most people will plan to do, for her.
Hosting foreign dignitaries, representing our nation on the global stage, getting in front of a camera at times of crisis, weekly phone calls with politicians and the like.
It’s a full time job. Regardless of whether you like the royal family or appreciate their role - the lady has been flat chat in life for longer than most of us will be alive.
Only if you have the right Constitutional Monarch.
And we certainly have - I also believe Charles and subsequently William will continue in the same vein. It's the way they've been brought up, to primarily to serve the Nation.
Outside the queen,Charles and William I have no interest in the royal family.The queen is probably the most respected person in existance,I once recall her standing next to Putin and he looked extremely uncomfortable,it is usually the other way round.She will go on to the end,possibly the only way she can cope with loss of Philip.Possibly the only time she put a foot slightly wrong was when Diana died,other than that she has been to my mind faultless.I wish this lady well,and feel very lucky to have had her as our head of state for so long.
I think the vast majority of people appreciate what the queen has done for the country and when the time comes it will be a sad period indeed. However she will be a very hard act to follow and I think some rethinking from the institution might be needed in order to survive long term.
What actually has she done?
A new low point.
Maybe, but what has she actually done?
If ever a figurehead was required in the latter half of the 20th century and and the 21st then surely the Queen has earned our deepest respect. How she has managed to hold her head up through all the turmoil that she has endured with her shonky family is beyond me.
What sort of “accomplishments” did you have in mind my the way iainment.
To be fair iainment was asking what AndyG and MrWalker what accomplishments they had in mind (the former stating 'the vast majority of people appreciate what the queen has done for the country')
For many years she has stepped up when times have been difficult and been a voice of stability and reason for the people of this country and indeed overseas. She has been a major influence on foreign dignitaries and governments helping the UK in negotiations, there have been many times in the recent history of this country when we have needed her to bring a calming influence. As I said earlier I'm not a massive royalist and think once she is gone the establishment will be in trouble however to ask what she has done is on par with the famous line from Monty python " what have the Roman's ever done for us " 🙄
She is a figurehead for this country and a respected throughout the world.
The queen has no real tangible power, she doesn’t change laws, she can’t say off with their heads , she cannot jail people on a whim
what she can do, is represent the country at home and abroad, and preside over a democratically elected government and in my opinion she does it with class and dignity
Met every prime - minister almost weekly since Churchill. In doing this she embodies the fine balance between parliamentary democracy and a kingdom. She does this without fear or favour. They respect and vale her too
She then meets with members of the public And has done so for 80 years. She makes herself available and in doing so is the living embodiment of how the nation (for good or bad)is held together. She is part of the glue
She is the Head of the Commonwealth a remarkable organisation in the modern world.
She is held in high regard by virtually every head of state in the world. Our countries esteem around the globe is in part due to the life of service she has given.
The British public love and respect her regardless of any royalist or republican sentiment
She is the head of a family that have to a great degree not followed her example of sobriety and service.
She has worked hard for nearly 80 years meeting her promise of service
Hope she is well soon and able to live for many more years.
When the sadly inevitable happens I think the monarchy will continue just as before.
Charles and then William will get the same deference and respect from royalists, politicians and overseas tourists and heads of state.
Those who don't like or don't want a monarchy will continue in those views.
I can't see the UK switching to a pushbike monarchy as in parts of Scandinavia, it's too closely tied in with national identity and patriotism for many British people to be so low key and a republic isn't a realistic option.
You only have to think back to the hysteria over the death of Princess Diana, the then heavy criticism of the Queen and royal family but how quickly that was forgotten to see just how resilient the institution of the monarchy is in this country.
At the danger of straying into territory where my stalkers and pile on club call for me to get banned I want to mention the ‘lied to the Queen’, and ‘judges are traitors’ issues of recent times. The Prime Minister is not all powerful in both a real and especially technical sense. The monarch is head of the Church, Forces and Judiciary, and may have other ‘buck stops’ roles as in being the person foreign diplomats are ‘visiting’, (as in all the ‘court of King James malarkey). To my mind the monarch being the head of the forces and the judiciary is a good thing, provided a non controversial low profile is kept. The present Queen has been brilliant at that…being the head honcho but not interfering, whether another monarch would be as good is doubtful. Her accumulated experience in her role has enhanced that function and her nominal status as head of state has helped avoid a political dictatorship (at least up till now). The blood runs cold at recent news that the government wants the power to overturn what it calls judicial errors or mistakes. This is where sovereignty is a genuine player, the monarch via the courts protecting us against a tyrannical government. Maybe a written constitution would fulfil the same function I don’t know. Queen Elizabeth the Second has been a lucky phenomena for the UK because she has fulfilled her anachronistic role so well. She has demonstrated a metamorphosis into historical greatness that can only be admired. I hope she carries on for many years.
She is a figurehead for this country and a respected throughout the world.
The queen has no real tangible power, she doesn’t change laws, she can’t say off with their heads , she cannot jail people on a whim
what she can do, is represent the country at home and abroad, and preside over a democratically elected government and in my opinion she does it with class and dignity
100% this.
For me she is the most respected and admired head of state in the world and as a person she has been an incredible servant to this country. I vehemently disagree that she has held that position via an accident of birth, but that doesn't take anything away from her as an incredible figurehead. We could not have elected a better one, she did not get the job through merit, but she has held it with merit.
In light of AFKAs request not to start controversial non Charlton related threads maybe this one needs to go.
Or people could just show some respect and shut up
"Agree with me or shut up".
You can’t resist trying to wind people up over a 95 year old woman being unwell. Do you not realise how pathetic that makes you look?
Yes. You keep saying how pathetic I am. It's nothing to do with her being unwell and I don't wish her anything but good health but the kneejerk subservience is pathetic.
Subservience? What are you talking about? It’s literally a thread of people showing respect, apart from you. If that irritates you so much, perhaps close the thread and read something else.
At the danger of straying into territory where my stalkers and pile on club call for me to get banned I want to mention the ‘lied to the Queen’, and ‘judges are traitors’ issues of recent times. The Prime Minister is not all powerful in both a real and especially technical sense. The monarch is head of the Church, Forces and Judiciary, and may have other ‘buck stops’ roles as in being the person foreign diplomats are ‘visiting’, (as in all the ‘court of King James malarkey). To my mind the monarch being the head of the forces and the judiciary is a good thing, provided a non controversial low profile is kept. The present Queen has been brilliant at that…being the head honcho but not interfering, whether another monarch would be as good is doubtful. Her accumulated experience in her role has enhanced that function and her nominal status as head of state has helped avoid a political dictatorship (at least up till now). The blood runs cold at recent news that the government wants the power to overturn what it calls judicial errors or mistakes. This is where sovereignty is a genuine player, the monarch via the courts protecting us against a tyrannical government. Maybe a written constitution would fulfil the same function I don’t know. Queen Elizabeth the Second has been a lucky phenomena for the UK because she has fulfilled her anachronistic role so well. She has demonstrated a metamorphosis into historical greatness that can only be admired. I hope she carries on for many years.
Comments
54 countries and 2.4 billion people who look upon the Queen as a solid, unshakable and honest figurehead.
The Commonwealth is a remarkable international organisation, spanning every geographical region, religion and culture. It exists to foster international co-operation and trade links between people all over the world. It is a voluntary association of independent countries, almost all of which were formerly under British rule.
The Queen dedicated her life to the Commonwealth on her 21st birthday in a remarkable speech from South Africa. She has never wavered from those words you can read them here.
https://www.royal.uk/21st-birthday-speech-21-april-1947
One thing i would say is that i fully expect apathy towards the monarch to increase if Charles takes over, so i'd hope he abdicates and gives it to William.
No drifting in to retirement like most people will plan to do, for her.
Hosting foreign dignitaries, representing our nation on the global stage, getting in front of a camera at times of crisis, weekly phone calls with politicians and the like.
And we certainly have - I also believe Charles and subsequently William will continue in the same vein. It's the way they've been brought up, to primarily to serve the Nation.
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” ― Winston S. Churchill
As I said earlier I'm not a massive royalist and think once she is gone the establishment will be in trouble however to ask what she has done is on par with the famous line from Monty python " what have the Roman's ever done for us " 🙄
what she can do, is represent the country at home and abroad, and preside over a democratically elected government and in my opinion she does it with class and dignity
- She has worked hard for nearly 80 years meeting her promise of service
I’d say by any standard that’s not a bad effortWhen the sadly inevitable happens I think the monarchy will continue just as before.
Charles and then William will get the same deference and respect from royalists, politicians and overseas tourists and heads of state.
Those who don't like or don't want a monarchy will continue in those views.
I can't see the UK switching to a pushbike monarchy as in parts of Scandinavia, it's too closely tied in with national identity and patriotism for many British people to be so low key and a republic isn't a realistic option.
You only have to think back to the hysteria over the death of Princess Diana, the then heavy criticism of the Queen and royal family but how quickly that was forgotten to see just how resilient the institution of the monarchy is in this country.
The Prime Minister is not all powerful in both a real and especially technical sense.
The monarch is head of the Church, Forces and Judiciary, and may have other ‘buck stops’ roles as in being the person foreign diplomats are ‘visiting’, (as in all the ‘court of King James malarkey).
To my mind the monarch being the head of the forces and the judiciary is a good thing, provided a non controversial low profile is kept.
The present Queen has been brilliant at that…being the head honcho but not interfering, whether another monarch would be as good is doubtful. Her accumulated experience in her role has enhanced that function and her nominal status as head of state has helped avoid a political dictatorship (at least up till now).
The blood runs cold at recent news that the government wants the power to overturn what it calls judicial errors or mistakes.
This is where sovereignty is a genuine player, the monarch via the courts protecting us against a tyrannical government. Maybe a written constitution would fulfil the same function I don’t know.
Queen Elizabeth the Second has been a lucky phenomena for the UK because she has fulfilled her anachronistic role so well. She has demonstrated a metamorphosis into historical greatness that can only be admired.
I hope she carries on for many years.
Well said mate.