I am home with a nasty headcold today, so I am sitting here in my PJs looking at the latest celebrity gossip headlines. You know, in case my girlfriend Angelina Jolie or any of her six adorable children have done anything interesting today. Unfortunately, there is no news about Angie or my other celebrity crushes… this is probably because the gossip news is swamped with stories related to the recent engagement of Kate Middleton and Prince William. There are stories about the proposal, the ring, who designed Kate’s engagement announcement dress, and even how to place bets on when and where the royal wedding will take place.
I have to admit that, browsing these stories, I find them somewhat entertaining… in the way that I find stories about movie stars interesting. Kate Middleton is indeed a snazzy (if a bit preppy) dresser, but beyond that she seems one-dimensional to me. I guess I admire that she is a “commoner” marrying a Prince, but, really, I’ve seen that Disney movie before. As for Prince William, I have nothing against him but, honestly, I’ve never even had a crush on Prince William- not even many years ago when my high school roommate (I went to an all-girls boarding school) plastered her walls with pictures of the Prince.
So, I generally ignore these Prince William and Waity Katie (I guess she’s not Waity anymore) gossip stories as they don’t interest me very much. However, I was surprised yesterday when the engagement of Prince William and Waity Katie was the top news story not just at the gossip websites, but everywhere! I guess I shouldn’t be so surprised, but a part of me was wondering- why is this more important than Cholera in Haiti or the new TSA screenings? Why should I care about this Kate Middleton person?
Then it dawned on me… Kate and Prince William are being married in the United Kingdom. Kingdom! The UK is still a monarchy! Please, UK residents, help me out… am I correct in understanding that you really do live in a Kingdom? A Kingdom with a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary system, but still a monarchy? And is it true (if unlikely) that if the Queen wanted to dissolve the parliamentary government she could do so? ARE YOU ALL OKAY WITH THIS? I suppose this shocks my rebel American system. But do you really have the same government system as countries such as Jordan, Malaysia, and Thailand? Those are very nice countries, by the way, but ones that I really do think of as Kingdoms.
So… if Kate Middleton one day becomes Queen (or at least wife to the King), she could actually have real, genuine power? Woah. Suddenly I’m worried about much more than what blue dress Kate wore to her engagement announcement.
By the way, UK and territories (you hear me, Australia and Canada) I think it is strange that you put the Queen on all your money. I guess that should have been my first hint that you are still King (Queen?) doms. I suggest replacing the Queen with more pictures of cute cuddly koalas and platypuses (in Australia) and more more ducks and maple leaves (in Canada).
I’ve always thought of modern royalty as nothing more than the accidental decedents of medieval crime families and oppressive warlords; not to mention all the inbreeding issues. And I hope Kate’s parents get a nice vacation out of the deal.
The royal family is mostly ceremonial today. In fact, there has been a lot of unrest for British citizens arguing that they shouldn’t have to foot the bill anymore…I wouldn’t be surprised if we see the Royal Family fade away in a generation or 2.
By the way, my one venture outside today (shortly) will be to mail Danarra the rocks… sick or not, I’m going to stop procrastinating that! Fortunately, the post office is only 5 minutes away…
Is it wrong that I find Evelyn’s news much more interesting than who some prince is going to marry?
I always found it strange and amusing that the royal families of Germany and England are one and the same yet they still managed to try and wipe each other out.
Makes the drama at my family reunions seem quite tame.
Man, why does Australia get the cuddly animals on their money? We have… beavers…
But yeah, I find it mildly disturbing that I have to put “Property her majesty the queen in Canada” on the bottom of all my slides/reports/posters for federal research projects.
The only real life she-marries-the-prince story in my lifetime starred Prince William’s dog-ugly father – no thanks.
Little girls need a real life perfect handsome prince to dream about, and as far as I can see this one turned out pretty damned good. Happy to see he grew up so well despite his tragedy and that he found someone. I feel sorry for her, and hope the UK press remembers what they did to his mother and doesn’t hound this poor girl to her death.
“Why Should I Care About Kate Middleton?”
I have no idea, Evelyn.
I’d get rid of the lot in a heart beat. If Charles had any balls at all he’d abdicate as soon as he’s made king and call an end to it all.
If I was being overly generous, at a push I’d consider them over-paid employees in the Great Britain theme park that apparantly tourists like to visit.
I can honestly say I see no reasosn at all to be interested in these in-bred parasites. I’m amazed we still think it’s even acceptable to use words such as “royalty” and “commoner”.
WTF?
I’d still argue that William and Kate deserve more airtime than Sarah Palin’s brood…but no! I’ll get no surcease from that!
Also the same government as Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands.
But as you said, our system is a Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy, the Queen has no actual power. It is her government, but the power lies with Parliament. She does dissolve parliament, but it is the Prime Minister that decides when (i.e. for elections).
Don’t think having the Queen on money is all that bad, she is the figure head of the country after all. Besides we have Darwin on the other side of the £10, that’s got to tick some boxes surely?
Canada, et al, are not in any way part of the UK and haven’t been for many years. Queen Elizabeth II is Queen of Canada, but that’s a separate Realm.
It’s all hokey, sure, but Canada (and most of the rest) while members of the same Commonwealth as the UK really are separate.
I think you should care. A bit. While
KateCatherine won’t have actual power she will (already does) have access to those in power that you or I could never hope to have. She’ll have influence over funding for many non-governmental organizations.Look at Diana’s legacy and she never even made it to queen.
@PASmith the underlying problem with that is that the UK does not have a constitution as most people understand it. The majority party* in parliament has effectively unlimited power. The only back stop is the monarchy. You’d need to replace that piece of the government.
Mike
* Since there’s no majority party at the moment the point is a little moot right now. But times change…
Okay I’ll give this one a go, yes we do live in a consitutional monarchy over here however this actually works quite well.
“and is it true (if unlikely) that if the Queen wanted to dissolve the parliamentary government she could do so?”
Technically yes, however if she were to actually do this without a request from the prime minister she would be forced to abdicate. The monarch cannot go against the will of the House of Commons.
“So… if Kate Middleton one day becomes Queen (or at least wife to the King), she could actually have real, genuine power?”
No that power, such as it is, would reside with William the King, not the Queen.
Having this sort of arrangement does have other quirks. Every week or so the prime minister must go to the monarch and report on how the whole governing of the country is going. This, I think, probably injects some humility as the most powerful person in the country must be generally a bit more servile than he or she would otherwise have to be. No bad thing in my book .
I once heard it said that the strength of our mornarch is not in the power that it weilds but that which it denys to others.
As for the big question, why should you care, well you’d be in good company over here if you didn’t.
@QuestionAuthority: This is my answer too. The papers this morning all (apart from one or two) have this on the front page, page 2, page 3, page 4, page 5, etc, etc. The 10 o’clock news last night was actually presented from outside Buckingham Palace. Neither of them even live in the bloody place.
I could almost accept them reporting the engagement announcement (but not like this), even though it’s a complete non-story if they weren’t going to go on about it every fucking day for as long as it takes until they get married.
Canadian bank notes aren’t all the queen (just the $20 in the current series, I think). The rest are former prime ministers. And we’ve got some critters on there, too (most of our change, and back in the 80s our bank notes featured bird species).
She appears on all of our change, but really — our currency would be a total sausage fest if it weren’t for her.
In australia we do put those cuddly things on our money, on the other side, the 20c coin has the platypus but we don’t appear to have a koala as a prominent part of any of our currency.
on our notes however only the $5 note (our lowest denomination note) has the queen on it.
Also there have been a few referendums for if australia should become a republic but they have failed for 2 reasons 1. our current system works and usually the proposed replacement model of government has some flaws 2. sentimentality. Queen Elizabeth II has been around forever and we have grown to like having her there, as soon as she is out though there is likely to be another referendum with a good chance of success.
When you are talking about monarchys (archies?) of the world, you left out a few Ev…
Beside the 4 you mention, there are:
Bahrain
Belgium
Brunei
Cambodia
Denmark
Japan
Kuwait
Lesotho
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Monaco
Morocco
Netherlands
Norway
Oman
Qatar
Samoa
Saudi-Arabia
Spain
Swaziland
Sweden
and Tongo
@quarksparrow: “but really — our currency would be a total sausage fest if it weren’t for her.”
Now THERE’S a phrase that’s probably never been written/spoken in the history of the universe :)
Yep. Here in the UK we are a proper monarchy.
I think in theory the Queen could dissolve parliament on a whim, but in reality it would have to be a military coup to succeed.
Are we happy about this? Well, some are and some realise it ain’t gonna happen, so don’t worry too much about it. I guess the same question could be asked about the USAians: are you happy that your president could suspend all democracy if desired?
As an aside, Prince William flies search and rescue helicopters over the mountains and sea near where I live. A very difficult, dangerous and worthy job. Not the impression that is often given of dilettante royalty.
@spurge:
One of my history teacher’s favourite anecdotes was a letter (or was it a telegram?) the German emperor wrote to the British king on the eve of WWI, paraphrased: “Let’s not go to war, please – what would grandma say?”
Grandma being Queen Victoria, to both of them.
Please let me “enlighten” you ;)
Yes, theoretically the Queen could dissolve parliament. While this may sound odd, in reaity it would NEVER happen. If the Queen were to do that then it would undoubtfully be then end of the monarchy. Plus, the Queen will never ever make any comment about politics on her view on issues, as she tries to be completely unbiased. Also try to consider that there are benefits to this. If a radical and destructive, racist government were to come to power (which could happen in any country), the Queen would have to choice to stop it. Is that not a small benefit?
And what Americans do not realise is that our Head of State system has (at least in the last century or so) arguably worked better than yours. The Queen is an unbiased, unpolitial figure, for both the UK, AUS and Canada. She is not, and will never be corrupt. As they say: Absolute power corrupts absolutely. She doesn’t have absolute power. However, look at some recent US Presidents. George Bush was not exactly a very good representative for the US was he? He reinforced prejudice American stereotypes. However the Queen is seperate from the Prime Minister, and it is her that foreign heads of state look forward to meeting. They want all of the regality and banqueting.
Also consider Richard Nixon, as we know, he was corrupt. This has not happened in our system of Constituional Monarchy, as it can’t!
Add to that the Queen obviously brings in a lot of tourism. Undoubtedly far more than it costs to supoprt her and the palaces (£0.69 per person).
I think a royal family is also a good thing for a country to have. Kate Middleton, for example, is obviously extremely intelligent and well-educated, and will probably become a female role-model (think Princess Diana). This is far better than being associated with a trashy, tacky celebrity, who isn’t very intelligent (Paris Hilton type). Also, the Royal family does A LOT for charity. People seem to think the Queen does nothing all day. She works something along the lines of 300 days a year!!! Would you like to be her? I wouldn’t!
You also ask whether we are ok with our system. We are, at least I know we are in England. Obviously there are Republicans, but they are a political group you NEVER hear about.
As for why you should care about Kate, I say this: Although she is young and not exactly a Saint or anything, is she not the kind of person young girls should aspire to be? She’s clever and seems genuinely kind, and has a normal job. Some young people now just aspire to be Lady Gaga or (in some rare UK reports) marry a footballer!
As for Can and Aus, the Queen has always said that whether or not they choose to leave the monarchy behind, it is their choice and she will not interfere. Plus, it gives us, like the Commonwealth, a special kind of connection.
Finally, it makes us a bit different, doesn’t it? Do we really want to end up with a President as Head of State like 200 other countries? No. Also, if in the US a foreign leader has an intense disliking of the US President, they have no choice but to dislike the head of state aswell, unlike the UK where they are detached and seperate.
P.S. Hope I made things a bit clearer for you.
I heard about this story because I frequently watch BBCA when there’s nothing better on than news. So even though I’m in the U.S. I get an interesting perspective.
This morning one of the British reporter guys basically explained that the monarch is a symbol of the country’s identity, sort of the way the flag is in the United States. The monarch has little power because they elect a Prime Minister, but the monarch does act as cultural glue.
The fascination with the idle rich that people have mystifies me. Historical continuity aside, this