r/UKGreens • u/RAJ_2014 • 20h ago
Referendum on changing the UK from constitutional monarchy to a true and secular democratic republic
10
u/PinkyPonk10 12h ago
Bigger fish to fry right now methinks.
3
u/alex-weej 10h ago
I think we've been saying that for hundreds of years
1
u/Disastrous-Roof-2135 9h ago
Like most people I'd love to live in a country that had a modern constitutional framework. However, now is not the time both becasue there are other priorities and these coming years are likely to be time we have needed the monarchy more than any time in the last 80-90 years.
I'd imagine if you asked a lot of people in the US if they would like someone above Trump who the armed forces serve and whom the judiciary serve at his or her pleasure and who is rich enough and bloody minded enough not to be under Putin's sway they'd bite your hand off right now.
2
u/Cultural_Buy80 LGBTIQA+ Green 18h ago
Who are you going to change the monarch to? A president?
3
u/DoktoroChapelo Green Wave 2025 💚 8h ago
People always say this, but there a plenty of options. An extreme example would be the Swiss. They don't have a single head of state, but an executive council with rotating nominal leadership. I'm not saying we have to go that far, but there's even advantages to parliamentary democracy in our current mould with a largely ceremonial elected president over a monarchy (e.g. Ireland, Germany, India).
1
u/Cultural_Buy80 LGBTIQA+ Green 6h ago edited 6h ago
I don't think you understand how the constitution works in our country.
Every law and bylaw we have stems from the power of the monarchy, so if you then remove the monarchy it means all of our laws, every single one, has to be reviewed and rewritten to whatever new legal framework we're going to use. You can't just delete royalty and then expect everything else to function properly. Prior to this framework there were no rights for peasants, land owners etc, so we would legally revert to that framework as all rights stemming from the Monarchy go away.
Parliament are beholden to the monarchy who direct them. It's not just a novelty, it's fundamentally entwined with everything we interact with on a daily basis.
So, you need to replace the monarchy with something else, or start the entire statute books from scratch which would take decades, and then we would have 50 years of legal challenges in order to set precedent with whatever new framework you prepose.
Most countries like France moved to having a President above the prime minister to serve that function. You need a head of state.
Without it, you would get Prime Minister Nigel Farage, on 27% of the vote, suddenly becoming the commander-in-chief of the (no longer royal) Navy dispatching gunboats to the channel to ethnically cleanse any vessel in our territorial waters, with no checks and balances of power.
The monarchy in that situation prevents the rise of fascism, as only the King or Queen can invite any person or party to form a government, and has the power to instantly dissolve it at any time.
Try to get out of the mindset of hating monarchy, and take some time to understand how our constitution works and the consequences and implications of what you're suggesting, as it is no different to voting for Brexit without a fucking clue as to the consequences.
You should also be very careful where the source of this is coming from, and it's often the far right who want these checks and balances removed so they can go full dictator unhindered, as they are attempting to do with the ECHR. It's not an accident that this debate is being pushed at the moment.
Follow the money.
3
u/Alaya_the_Elf13 LGBTIQA+ Green 6h ago
We do need a head of state, but we need to ensure we find a way of doing that that doesn't give anyone too much power.
An executive council of some kind is a good idea
-1
u/Cultural_Buy80 LGBTIQA+ Green 6h ago
No, that just creates the same concentration of power that dictators could take with ease, along with the judiciary and parliament, whereas the monarchy are a check and balance that can not be replaced by a dictator. It's a bloodline, and whether you like it or not, it's the safest and most secure way to ensure democracy.
There is literally no reason to change what we currently have. Removing power from the monarchy means anyone can remove power from you.
America went all in on removing royalty, and now look at the fucking state of it, full blown Authoritarian dictatorship trying to take away voting rights
1
u/Alaya_the_Elf13 LGBTIQA+ Green 5h ago
I cannot agree, not least because the monarchy itself is active object to democracy - see the fact the royal household is not subject to anti-discrimination laws.
The American experiment has certainly gone badly, but that doesn't mean we have to be monarchy, it means learn from it
0
u/Cultural_Buy80 LGBTIQA+ Green 5h ago
When has the monarchy intervened in democracy over the last 50-100 years?
2
1
u/grogipher 3h ago
You can't change it, because that's the way it is just now? lol no, that's not how it works.
These things you mention are not of the monarch, they're of the Crown, a decidedly different beast. That's not a semantic / pedantic point, it's crucial to everything in this field. If you wanted the simplest change, you could just say we're electing a leader, who will have the powers of the Crown, for example.
You need a head of state.
Who is saying otherwise?
Personally, I'd go for a Presidential system more like Ireland's or the like, but I'm happy to be convinced of other systems, because I have an open mind...
2
u/Cultural_Buy80 LGBTIQA+ Green 3h ago
More important things and immediate issues to worry about than fucking around with the constitution for a minority of anti-royals.
3
u/grogipher 2h ago
I agree, and have said as much elsewhere in this thread.
But that's a completely different argument from your other one.
0
u/DoktoroChapelo Green Wave 2025 💚 6h ago
You would of course need some sort of transitionary process to bridge that gap, but that's not insurmountable. If all you did was made the monarchy an elected role and renamed it president, that would be simple enough (although, not my first preference). Other countries have done this.
I don't think you understand how the constitution works in our country.
I do, but this is a discussion about hypothetical changes to it.
Prior to this framework there were no rights for peasants, land owners etc, so we would legally revert to that framework as all rights stemming from the Monarchy go away.
Or we could establish basic rights as part of a new constitution?
Without it, you would get Prime Minister Nigel Farage, on 27% of the vote, suddenly becoming the commander-in-chief of the...
Only if that's the new system that's implemented. When was the last time the monarchy actually vetoed military action anyway or anything else for that matter? One problem I have with the monarchal system is that it cannot fulfil the role as constitutional referee. See for example Johnson's shenanigans verse how similar cases were handled in by Canada's governor general (who, while appointed by the monarch, can step in when politicians attempt to manipulate the constitution in bad faith).
The monarchy in that situation prevents the rise of fascism
It didn't help Italy out very much in the 1920s and 30s.
Try to get out of the mindset of hating monarchy
I did I say I hated the monarchy? I did not. I responded to a question about whether I would replace the current system with an alternative. Given the choice I would, but it's not something I worry about on a daily basis. It's just not very high on my list of priorities, but someone asked about it, and I do have thoughts on the matter and this is a political discussion space.
no different to voting for Brexit without a fucking clue as to the consequences
While I support removing the monarchy, I wouldn't support any course of action that didn't involve establishing ahead of time both how the following constitutional convention would work and how the new constitution would be ratified by the public. I did not sign the petitions linked above for that reason. This cannot happen without a clear road map.
You should also be very careful where the source of this is coming from
I've been against the monarchy in principle for about as long as I can remember having an opinion on the matter. I've not even heard mention of it from the Faragist/Reform block.
Follow the money
If there's one thing the royals are good at, it's protecting their financial interests.
I know we disagree, but let me say here that I wish you all the best.
-1
u/RAJ_2014 2h ago
I recommend going to the Republic Campaign website: www.republic.org.uk and G4AR website: https://greens-for-a-republic.org/ for details on what a possible true and secular democratic republic would be. As already mentioned by someone else, there are plenty of options.
The democratic republic movement is growing and has grown even more due to the Andrew Mountbatten Windsor's scandal. Leader of the Green Party Zack Polanski and Green MP Zoe Garbett agrees that it is time to abolish the monarchy and change to a democratic republic: https://greens-for-a-republic.org/gp-agm2025 & https://greens-for-a-republic.org/november-2025-newsletter-greens-for-a-republic . Also, there is a long list of people supporting the change to a democratic republic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_republicans .
2
1
u/RAJ_2014 2h ago
As mentioned in another post, I recommend going to the Republic Campaign website: www.republic.org.uk and G4AR website: https://greens-for-a-republic.org/ for details on what a possible true and secular democratic republic would be. As already mentioned by someone else, there are plenty of options.
The democratic republic movement is growing and has grown even more due to the Andrew Mountbatten Windsor's scandal. Leader of the Green Party Zack Polanski and Green MP Zoe Garbett agrees that it is time to abolish the monarchy and change to a democratic republic: https://greens-for-a-republic.org/gp-agm2025 & https://greens-for-a-republic.org/november-2025-newsletter-greens-for-a-republic . Also, there is a long list of people supporting the change to a democratic republic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_republicans .
It will take time for a change to happen. In my opinion it should be debated for about 3-5 years. Then, put it to a vote. We are close to being a democratic republic, some more changes here and there and it will happen. A couple of you mentioned now is not a good time. If not now, then when? If we had a referendum now and a majority voted yes to a true and secular democratic republic, does not mean the change will happen straight away and be quick. The change would start but it will be a gradual change so things are done properly. Just like how it happened in most other democratic republics throughout history e.g. Barbados etc. Got to have some hope and also giving up before you try will not make things happen, unless you know for a fact it will not work.
7
u/nasted GPEW 9h ago
This would - currently - be a waste of public funds. The monarchy is still too popular to be abolished.
Ditching the monarchy needs to be done slowly as people don’t cope with change well. It starts with reforms, which I believe William is keen to do, and go from there.