English Chess Forum

I myself am OK with having the Royal Family, it does add something to our image. I agree with Alan's reasons above too. No one can deny the excellent work the Queen herself has done over the years, she is a remarkable woman. Don't forget she sees the Prime Minister each week, where she must be of some comfort and stress reliever to the PM. Even Prince Philip, despite his occasional "remarks", has been an excellent servant to Britain and the Commonwealth.

Simon Dixon wrote:

Hanoverian, actually.

IOW deposed German royalty and most clowns who adore them, think they are British.

Most people who have ancestors who emigrated to this country 300 years ago, and whose families have lived here ever since, would have a reasonable claim on British nationality i think.

Alan Burke wrote:Yes, many in this country might be against having a Royal Family, but let them also put forward a viable alternative, not only as a ruler for the country, but one which is held in as high an esteem by those abroad.

I think the fact that our Head of State is apolitical is a good thing.

Take Barack Obama. He'll be popular with 50-55% of Americans, but unpopular with 45-50%. This is largely because he has a political party attached to his name, and then a further lack of popularity may ensue when it comes to his policies. The Queen is far more popular in the UK than Obama in the US as a result.

I remember seeing a video online where Hugo Chavez was having a go at our monarchy; something about being anti-democracy. I thought that was quite rich from a country that's on its Fifth Republic in the last 300 years. The UK seems to have been pretty stable politically given our territory has never had an elected Head of State in its history, save for a brief dabble with Republicanism.

Richard Bates wrote:

Simon Dixon wrote:

Hanoverian, actually.

IOW deposed German royalty and most clowns who adore them, think they are British.

Most people who have ancestors who emigrated to this country 300 years ago, and whose families have lived here ever since, would have a reasonable claim on British nationality i think.

That's fair enough, but not many ancestors emigrated to rule the United Kingdom, which is the point I think.

Simon Dixon wrote:That's fair enough, but not many ancestors emigrated to rule the United Kingdom, which is the point I think.

Neither did George I. He was King of Great Britain between 1714 and 1727, 64 years before the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was formed.

The historical context of why he was asked to be King of Great Britain, was that William III & Mary II had no descendants, so the previous law about the successors going through them needed amending. So, they went back to Sophia of Hanover. who was pretty much the only candidate to continue the line, because every other candidate in that generation had died or were unable to give birth.

Sophia was the grand-daughter of James, who had been a King of both England and Scotland, and every monarch to this day is directly related to her. So while yes, she lived most of her life in what we now call Netherlands and Germany, she is a direct descendant of an English King.