Despite the fundamental changes the country has undergone, over 60% of the population still prefer the monarchy as their system of government, despite declining support among the younger generation.
II. Elizabeth’s death ends an era. During his 70-year reign, he witnessed tremendous social change.
Today’s England bears little resemblance to the post-war country in many ways. He went from a conservative and traditional society to a diverse country.
- Queen Elizabeth’s awakening: understand the symbolism and traditions of the ceremony
But a system based on monarchy, a legacy of power and privilege remains stable in popularity: 62% of Britons support it as a political system, according to a June YouGov poll.
Until now, one of the favorite members of the British royals, III. Charles felt the impact of the crown: his popularity has doubled since he became king.
This is clearly reflected in the mile-long queue of citizens formed to bid the queen a final farewell.
Experts say that in a nation without a national holiday, it is royal commitments such as jubilee or monarch’s birthdays that distinguish this area from the rest of the world, where British identity is glorified.
The relationship between the monarchy and the British was World War II, when a grieving nation celebrated her queen’s life as well as her own history. It reaches its climax with Elizabeth’s death.
Where does this support come from?
“The British value having a head of state separate and distinct from everyday politics,” says constitutionalist Craig Prescott, a professor at Bangor University in Wales.
The House of Commons can become a brutal place, and while conflict and political tension create unrest among citizens, the monarchy is often presented as a unifying figure representing all Britons, according to one expert.
- Queen The details Elizabeth chose when planning her funeral
Added to this is the way Elizabeth II has carried out her duties and devotion since 1952. She was such a popular monarch, and even many Republicans agree that she did a great job,” adds Prescott.
According to sociologist Laura Clancy, the monarchy has enjoyed steady support over the years for three main reasons. “For one, there is a strong association with national identity, history and nostalgia with a focus on monarchies.”
Also, “the British developed a strong affection for some members of the royal family, especially the Queen”.
And lastly, he “knew how to portray himself very well in the media by presenting a particular ideology to the public, such as monarchy, family values, philanthropy, ideas of service and duty,” says Clancy.
republican causes
However, although the weight of republicanism in the UK has changed little in recent years, the monarchy is not without criticism.
In 1969, 18% of Britons considered themselves Republicans. According to data from Ipsos Mori, this number now reaches 22%. However, according to YouGov data, this rate rises to 31% among the younger generation.
According to Prescott, “the question is whether these young people will continue to be Republicans or change their minds when they grow up.”
One of the main arguments against the monarchy is that it is “not democratic in principle”, says Graham Smith, president of the Republic, the main group advocating for system change in the UK.
“The institution serves no purpose, is corrupt, misuses public money and lobbies for its own interests,” Smith says.
His organization, which is trying to organize a referendum so that the British can choose their system of government, is holding back next year’s III. He plans a protest campaign for Charles’ coronation.
Another recurring criticism of monarchical institution is its cost. Calculating real finances is not easy. The Sovereign Grant, the public budget that goes to the royal family each year to manage their entertainment expenses, has exceeded US$100 million this year.
In contrast, advocates say the royal family has become a major tourist attraction and generates substantial income.
The Republic disagrees. “The monarchy doesn’t bring any money into the country, any estimate of the money they have to contribute is completely misleading. But it costs us £345m ($2.1bn) a year,” he criticizes, adding to Smith’s calculations for other expenses such as security (not included in the Sovereign Grant). ).
by Clancy Running the Family Firm: How does the monarchy manage its image and our money? (“Managing the family business: how the monarchy manages its image and our money”, in free translation), “the institution sanctifies a system of inequality and slavery”.
The Crown’s imperial and colonial past is also under attack, something “the new King and Prince of Wales will have to sort out,” according to Prescott.
Scandals over the past few decades, including the prosecution of Prince Andrew for sexual misconduct or the removal of Prince Harry and his wife Meghan from the royal family, have “done so much damage to the monarchy and sparked much more debate about why the monarchy,” Smith argues. .
british weirdness
Despite criticism, six out of ten Britons want England to remain a monarchy. A number that has dwindled over the last decade but is still valid.
What makes the British so fond of a system contrary to modern liberal democracy?
One of the thinkers who tried to explain this English temperament was Victorian essayist and journalist Walter Bagehot, who was one of the first editors of The Economist.
Inside British Constitution (The “Constitution of England”, in its free translation), published in 1867 and has become one of the canonical references for understanding the British political system, with the active element of the Constitution – the government – its solemn or its honorable “element” incarnated by the Monarchy.
Bagehot agreed that monarchy was nothing rational. But, he wrote, “the mystical reverence, the religious devotion, necessary for any true monarchy, are creative sentiments that no legislature can produce in a people.”
As the empire collapsed, “people pay homage to what might be called the theatrical spectacle of society. The culmination of this play is the queen,” Victoria said at the time.
These rituals and ceremonies such as the opening of the parliament, the proclamation, the coronation – after all, the theater Bagehot speaks of – ‘ensure continuity’.
“The persons involved have changed, but the ceremonies have remained the same. Elizabeth II had all kinds of government, be it Conservative, Labor, or coalition. But for all intents and purposes the ceremonies remained the same, so the changes don’t seem to be drastic.” In a way, the more things stay the same, the more they can change,” Prescott says.
The monarch explains Andrew Marr: diamond queen (“The Diamond Queen” in free translation), represents continuity: “A constitutional monarchy must represent the interests of the people before a government is elected and after it changes. Remember. Look to the future after the next election”.
It may defy logic for a democratic country in the 21st century to naturally accept that the new president’s credentials are based on his birth certificate. But here, says BBC editor Mark Easton, “logic is not the most important factor”.
“We are happy to acknowledge eccentricity and eccentricity as they reflect such an important part of our national identity. So when trying to explain the possible success of the monarchy, we should not expect the answer to be rational,” Easton explains.
“The British monarchy is appreciated because it is the British monarchy. We are an ancient and complex society that respects the theatrical image of society.”
source: Noticias
