Royalists and Republicans

Opinions on Campus

among 18-24 year olds, while 33% still supported the idea of the monarchy, 31% believed wte should instead have an elected head of state. Republican views have been present in the UK for centuries. Although they all ultimately believe in the abolition of the monarchy, they can take different forms.

For example, Marxism. The President of MarxSoc provided some information on the Marxist perspective of the royalist vs republican debate. According to Marxist theory “republicanism alone would do little to solve the fundamental inequalities and problems within British society today”. To them, the issue is not the monarchy alone, but classism and capitalism. The monarchy is fundamental to the continuing classism in the UK, and is supported by a capitalist system. Even if we abolish the monarchy tomorrow, the capitalist system will still remain, therefore the corruption, inequality and privilege

“I grew up in an environment with a relatively positive view of the monarchy. My family has a history of serving in the armed forces; my Dad grew up with a parent in the RAF” that the upper class enjoys is unchanged. “The whole economic system is rotten and must be replaced with an economy collectively owned, directed and managed by the working class.”

While clearly in support of abolishing the monarchy, the UoN marxists specify the need for a “socialist republic” which gives full power to the people. They believe this is the only way to “truly do away with the inequality, privilege and oppression that the monarchy represents”.

Personally, I am not against the monarchy but neither am I an enthusiastic supporter of it. I grew up in an environment with a relatively positive view of the monarchy. My family has a history of serving in the armed forces; my Dad grew up with a parent in the RAF and my maternal great-grandparents served in the Royal and Women’s Air Force during WWII. My social life as a child and teenager revolved around the Girl Guides; I still remember taking my Promise at 7 “to serve the Queen and my community, and to keep the Brownie Guide law”. At 19 I was thrilled and honoured to be invited to Buckingham Palace, where I met the Countess of Wessex, upon achieving my Gold Duke of Edinburgh Award. As a result, while many call for the removal of the monarchy, I don’t really see a problem with it. They have no real power - they’re just figureheads.

I spoke to Kit Sinclair, who like myself doesn’t have hugely strong opitnions on the monarchy but if pushed would consider herself a republican rather than a royalist. “Whilst the Queen was still alive I was happy to leave it, as it seemed ridiculous to remove her after so long.” Now, however, with the coronation of King Charles III, Kit believes that if the British monarchy were to continue it should be massively slimmed down: “They don’t need that many palaces!”

She also said the monarchy represents “huge levels of inequality that seem at odds with the modern, equitable country we want”, highlighting the insensitivity of spending huge amounts of money on a coronation when so many are struggling to stay afloat. “If we did keep the monarchy around, I wouldn’t mind seeing a more Danish model, where they live more ‘normal’ - if still very privileged - lives, with regular jobs.”

The Royal Family is certainly not exempt from criticism, however their cultural impact cannot be denied. Abolishing the monarchy and implementing a republic would “destroy centuries of British traditions, customs and practices” says Alfie Brinkley, a member of Nottingham University’s Conservative Association (NUCA). He spoke of the monarchy’s “extraordinary contributions” to the UK. “It generates millions of pounds for the country through the Crown Estate (providing more than the amount given to the Monarchy from taxpayers), runs multiple charitable organisations that positively impact people across the UK, provides a sense of unity and source of morale dur- ing times of crisis, and exemplifies significant British values such as duty, compassion and respect”.

It is true the UK is world-re nowned for the awe and pageantry associated with its monarchy. Daniel Arthur, another NUCA member, describes it as “an institution inextricable from Great Britain”. Daniel also opposes the idea of a republic, claiming they are “hollow to the core” and pose a significantly higher threat to democracy than a constitutional monarchy: “Republics elevate politicians to a position of supreme power, effectively electing kings as presidents”.

Given the current political climate and the state of our country’s government and the lack of trust in the Conservative Party, the idea of our Prime Minister being the elected head of state, with absolute control over the way our country is run is, in my view, incredibly alarming. Politicians have their own, often divisive agenda which they wish to implement - running the country based on their own political views. In contrast, a constitutional monarch is apolitical, designed to be a visible source/symbol of national unity and pride.

The debate between royalists and republicans over the future of the monarchy in the UK is constantly evolving. However, with so many ties to our history and national identity, the thought of no longer having a Sovereign is still bizarre. Is it that we cannot see Great Britain as anything other than a constitutional monarchy because we believe it is the most effective form of governance? Is it because we believe the idea of any one political party having complete control over legislation is far worse? Or is it just because that’s what we’re used to?