What’s this Queen crap? You mean they still haven’t dumped this outmoded, elitist, useless institution?
Careful - the view point you are expressing is one more normally associated with the left in those nations where the British Monarchy persists - and by your definitions must be deranged. :)
Seriously, there are advantages to having an apolitical Head of State, raised from birth in a tradition of service with a family heritage of loyalty to country going back centuries, as a ultimate control on the power of government.
And even many who might agree that in principle the Monarchy is outdated, will not support a change while the current Queen is on the throne. She has served her nation and her Commonwealth with honour, loyalty, and distinction for over eighty years, fifty five years of that as Queen.
For me - one important factor is that I swore allegiance to my Queen. And my oaths matter to me.
And it will take only a couple of weeks of Queen Hillary I to make you wish we had a Queen with the class of Lizzie Mountbatten, nee Windsor.
Oh, why don’t you crawl back into the woodwork.
‘What’s this Queen crap? You mean they still haven’t dumped this outmoded, elitist, useless institution?’
Hmmm, Outmoded? Elitist? Useless? You sound like a left winger describing the US constitution! :)
The concept of elected presidents is far too socialist for us Brits. We’ll stick with our old-fashioned right-wing monarchy if it’s all the same to you lest we might end up with a Carter or a Clinton as head of state. If your system is still working in a millenia like ours has, get back to us and we’ll have another look at it. . . . . :)
In effect they have. The queen's roll is essentially ceremonial. However, there is strength in tradition, culture and national identity. Soon, you will get to see first hand the impact of dumping tradition, culture and national identity.
You mean the same Queen who oderded the Guards to play the Star Spangled Banner after 9/11? She really is out of touch.