The Instigator
fuckthemonarchy
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Adze
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Should the British monarchy be abolished, the royal family exiled, and a Republican govt installed?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Adze
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/13/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 406 times Debate No: 84960
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

fuckthemonarchy

Pro

I believe Britain is one of the last remaining truly medieval nations (along with countries such as Saudi Arabia) and is spending waaaay to much money on some random old woman whose great great grandparents happened to be kings. The idea that someone should have even a small amount of political power based on birth is stupid, and is rejected by countries all around the world.

As for exile, yeah at least for a couple generations because frankly the Brits would probably still fund the family even if their titles were removed. I believe once the monarchy is forgotten and no one would ever try to restore it, the family may return to Britain as normal citizens.
Adze

Con

I accept your challenge. I will be addressing each of the three points individually.

The current system in the UK is not actually a true monarchy akin to the Middle Ages. The Royal Family does not have the absolute power that kings and queens have historically held. The current governmental system is a Constitutional Monarchy, and the legislative power of the king or queen is limited by Parliament and the British Constitution. In fact, the Royal Family holds very little power. Queen Elizabeth's role is primarily ceremonial. While she does perform several important duties, it is in fact Parliament that holds true power in the UK and the elected Prime Minister is the true leader, at least where actual political and legislative power is involved.

As for the question of exiling the Royal Family, I cannot see the moral or legal justification for this course of action. The Royal Family as a whole has not broken any laws and has not in any conceivable manner oppressed the citizens of the UK. The only crime, that you seem to feel is worthy of exile, is that they won the genetic lottery (or lost, depending on your point of view). Besides, there are certainly many British citizens who would be opposed to a forceful takeover of the government. If the Royal Family were to be exiled from the country, it would make them out to be pseudo-martyrs, which would then likely lead to civil unrest.

And finally, there's the issue of a pure republic replacing the current Constitutional Monarchy. As the primary governmental body in the UK is already comprised of elected officials, a pure republic of elected officials wouldn't be massively different, especially in regards to representation of the general public. In addition, a total alteration of a governmental system is rarely a smooth transition. The fact that the public and the politicians will be massively divided on the issue will lower the efficiency of the government, and if the public gets too worried about possibly authoritarian measures undertaken by the new rulers, it is not unlikely for crime rates and general civil unrest to rise. And lastly, republics tend to have the nasty habit of wanting to perpetuate themselves at all costs. This is observable in the United States, particularly in the legislative branch (Congress). The US is a Democratic Republic with one governmental branch to create law, one to execute it, and one to interpret it. Of course, there are other complexities and the roles are sometimes blurred, but that's a discussion for another time. The fact is, the politicians by and large are primarily interested in perpetuating their own power/financial interests, the interests of their respective political parties, and the perpetuation of the status quo. The clearest example of each of these three interests is that Congress almost unanimously voted to be able to set their own salaries (along with regular healthy raises), Republicans will oppose the majority of Democratic initiatives while supporting the motions of fellow party members and vice versa, and whenever an independent politician defies the odds and wins an important election, the parties combine to make sure that s/he has no chance of accomplishing anything, as was the case with Governor Jesse Ventura. While this is not a short-term concern when establishing a republic, it is very common for a republic to grow detached from the public and become self-serving.
Debate Round No. 1
fuckthemonarchy

Pro

fuckthemonarchy forfeited this round.
Adze

Con

As there has been no further response from my opponent and I have already laid out my base arguments, there is nothing further for me to say about my position and nothing to rebut.
Debate Round No. 2
fuckthemonarchy

Pro

fuckthemonarchy forfeited this round.
Adze

Con

I guess I win then? Shame. I was hoping for an actual debate.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
fuckthemonarchyAdzeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff many times, so conduct to Con.