How Does the British Monarchy Survive?
Britain’s parliamentary democracy still transcends its monarchy.
For any intelligent outsider watching this weekend's coronation in London, it almost certainly raises one question: Just how does an institution as unashamedly archaic as the British monarchy survive some 200 years of parliamentary democracy? The answer comes down to one word: neutrality.
Scratch beneath the surface and most Britons—even those proudly hanging the Union Jack bunting for the coronation—realize deep down how illogical it is to structure our entire constitution around one ruling family. Yet they also believe (perhaps correctly) that keeping our monarchy completely neutral is a foolproof system to eliminate any threat.
Of course, when it comes to party politics, that's easy enough. But in the age of the all-consuming culture wars, true neutrality can be hard to maintain. The modern-day risk isn't necessarily that the king expresses political views, it's that his views or actions end up becoming politicized.
We saw an example of this last November when the monarchy became dangerously close to being embroiled in a full-blown race quarrel (a row, incidentally, that did not involve Meghan Markle). It began when a long-term palace aide (a personal friend of the late queen) stepped down from her duties following her tactless questioning of a black British guest. Within hours, the story had exploded.
On television channels like GB News, right-wing blowhards thundered their predictable outrage that an 83-year-old aristocrat could be forced out for a supposedly innocent faux pas. In response, progressive newspapers ran equally template op-eds about how seriously we should all take so-called microaggressions in the workplace.
You may well have a view on the rights and wrongs of the Lady Susan Hussey saga. But that isn't the point. The real question is how an institution like Buckingham Palace—inevitably seen as an extension of its inhabitant—is meant to handle such a predicament when any response risks fanning the flames of the culture war.
In the end, the palace got it exactly right: with an unambiguous factual statement that stayed well clear of any wider "debate" around racism. Once the story had disappeared from the front pages, it quietly reinstated Hussey.
In the run-up to the coronation, the potential for a crisis has been even bigger. Take this week's surprise announcement from Buckingham Palace that the ceremony will break with tradition by inviting members of the public—yes, we mere mortals—to join in the traditional swearing of allegiance to the newly crowned king. This slightly clumsy gesture soon became the subject of a tedious online debate between pledgers and refuseniks.
What made the situation worse was the fact that England had just entered the final stretch of its local election campaigns. All of a sudden, any senior politician appearing on the broadcast rounds was being quizzed as to whether he personally would be pledging. Cue this rather cringeworthy clip of Foreign Secretary James Cleverly waxing obsequiously about the king's "very generous invitation."
Of course, some of the biggest bear traps were much closer to home for King Charles. Since he took the crown in September, the British media have been ablaze with speculation as to whether Prince Harry would attend the coronation. Perhaps inevitably, the Harry feud has become "coded" by the culture wars, with the estranged prince caricatured as an entitled "woke" brat whose values run contrary to British traditions.
At times, it seemed like an almighty storm might be blowing. Yet here we are at coronation and the bomb has been defused. Will there be difficult conversations this weekend between Harry and his father and brother? Almost certainly. But they will take place in private, and they won't stop the family from putting on a united front for the coronation.
Perhaps it sounds like simple public relations, but it runs much deeper than that. For the British monarchy, these kinds of controversies aren't just a potential image problem—they're an existential threat. A monarchy that divides opinion, particularly along existing cultural fault lines, risks undermining its own legitimacy.
That Charles has skillfully navigated the minefield so far means that Britain can actually come together to celebrate the coronation, albeit in the typical understated and semi-ironic way that we approach these occasions. By joining a street party or meeting a toast, you're not making any kind of statement—which is just the way it should be.
Underneath all the pageantry, it's quite simple: A Britain with a politicized monarchy is no longer a proper democracy. One of those matters more than the other.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
This is what America needs to do with its monarchy. Make the presidential role ceremonial and hand all real power back to congress.
” . . . hand all real power back to congress.”
You want to think that through.
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.…………>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
WFW RG R
Start now earning every week more than $5,000 by doing very simple and easyhome based job online. Last month i have made $19735 by doing this online jobjust in my part time for only 2 hrs a day using my laptop. This job is justawesome and easy to do in part time. Everybody can now get this and startearning more dollars online just by follow instructions here…………
.
.
Now Here ————————————->> https://Www.Coins71.Com
I have made $18625 last month by w0rking 0nline from home in my part time only. Everybody can now get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow details here..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.…………>> http://www.apprichs.com
Can’t possibly be worse.
I’m not going to take that bet.
Yeah, I’m with you Perl. That phrase in the political arena is the equivalent of “Hold my beer” on a Darwin Awards website.
Okay, I’m confused. Most of the power was congress’s to begin with. The president rules like an Emperor, albeit an elected one, and I’ve seen nothing good come of it.
Maybe one of you can explain why an imperial presidency is good for me.
It’s good if the emperor is on your team.
Patrick Henry predicted how this would turn out.
Thanks but maybe you should work on getting this asshole’s face off your money first 😉
Still his mom. Maybe next year.
>>power back to congress
good. god. no.
I’m against anything that moves us towards a parliamentary form of government. as bad as our government has become, parliamentary governments are worse.
I wonder if there is an alternative to granting all powers to a king or to a legislative body?
Frankly, British Democracy has not been going great shakes lately either. It has been incredibly illiberal recently.
I think you mean former Prince Harry. He’s not a prince anymore. The rest of the article was good.
He is still a Prince. That can not be taken away.
The only prince i ever respected lived in Minnesota.
What about the Fresh Prince?
I’d win a slap fight with him.
> It began when a long-term palace aide (a personal friend of the late queen) stepped down from her duties following her tactless questioning of a black British guest. Within hours, the story had exploded.
Oh, what a bunch of fucking ado about nothing.
I’m white as can be. Large chucks of my ancestry traced back to the British Isles, and beyond into Scandinavia. I also have a large beard. And through happenstance, a strange name. It is damned near canonical for people to ask me where my name is from. And the number of times women have come up and played with my beard without asking (and yeah, I get that it;’s obnoxious) is uncountable.
Get the fuck over yourself, lady. She’s 83. Be happy she wasn’t pissing herself.
The lesson to be learned is not to invite black women to a public event.
It is something that the Telegraph article almost completely avoids what the exact conversation was but is so sure that it is racism rather than something like an old woman being somewhat dotty and not understanding who she was talking to.
Lady Susan Hussey was set up. The woman showed up at the Palace fully decked out in native African garb, so it was absolutely logical to think that she was from other lands – as Hussey assisted Her Late Majesty in meeting so many delegations from so many nations. That the woman took such deep offense at Hussey’s innocent questions was absolutely and totally staged for political purposes as the woman was an anti-monarchist there ready to take offense.
Everyone realizes that the British Monarchy is simply a tourist attraction at this point, right?
I’d rather visit the Burger King king than the British king.
Better food for sure.
It’s more complicated than that. But the monarchy is certainly not governing Great Britain anymore. He’s kind of like Kahless’ clone in Star Trek the Next Generation.
You get a medal for that reference.
Paraphrasing Christopher Hitchens on prince Charles: “An Islamic apologist with poor taste in women.”
Yep. He’s a homely guy, but he still grew up as one of the most eligible bachelors on the planet.
Take a look at his current squeeze.
I’m not defending his taste. He could have gotten some prime pieces of ass if he wanted to. I’m guessing the guy is a total stiff, and not in a good way.
He could have gotten some prime pieces of ass if he wanted to
He did, as a young man.
And Camilla wasn’t exactly terrible:
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/69/8b/f0/698bf08da5baf2545e56c732722d7186.jpg
She was a pretty hot dish in her prime. Don’t make the mistakes of young kids looking at “old girls” of the past. In my teenage years, Diana Rigg was the hottest thing going. Frankly, at my age she looks pretty good, and so goes Camilla. It’s all in your perspective!
Now imagine you have options.
Face it. Most Brits with an inclination towards liberty packed up and left around 1776. The genetic stock that remained is conditioned to like kings and queens and following nanny state orders, at least when they are not rioting at soccer, er, football matches.
The Brits who loved liberty were murdered off in the Great War.
How does the British Monarchy survive? The Monarch has an absolute veto power over all acts of Parliament. You can’t actually get rid of them save through their own assent or violent force.
That veto power hasn’t been used in forever.
The Royal Assent has not been refused since 1707, when Queen Anne refused it for a Bill for settling the militia in Scotland.
So much for the despotic powers of the British Sovereign.
AFAIK, the last exercise of royal power was in 1940 following Dunkirk, when the King called upon Winston Churchill to form a coalition government, as an alternative to holding an election in the middle of a war for national survival. Churchill was _not_ the King’s choice, but the only man the royal advisers could think of that could make that coalition government work.
I wonder, as illogical as it is to believe that the Head of State should be the eldest son of a single family, I wonder, how is illogical is it to believe that the Head of State should be the person chosen to by majority vote of a population that has been determined to be largely functionally illiterate by many academic studies?
Luckily, neither of those scenarios occurs here in the US.
It was the functionally illiterate that gave us Biden.
The Royal Assent has not been refused since 1707, when Queen Anne refused it for a Bill for settling the militia in Scotland.
So much for the despotic powers of the British Sovereign.
What is the role of the modern British monarchy today? To wave to the peasants as they ride by of course.
Its an excuse for people to take a day of work and get shitfaced.
You know the British well! They even used to come on base and celebrate the 4th of July with us.
HowWhy Does the British Monarchy Survive?FTFY
nice
By instinct and principle I’m a republican, but the monarchy seems to work well enough most of the time. Having a ceremonial head of state largely above the political fray, and with some (fake or hokey) glamour, appears to bring at least some benefit. Conservative posters here should hence approve of the monarchy as it is in Britain or in other largely Northern European constitutional monarchies.
Meanwhile, the only part of the Coronation I was interested in:
Zadok the Priest
The British monarchy is to the British people what ex-Presidents are to us. Once no longer in power, as long as they keep their mouths shut and stay out of controversial topics; they tend to get high approval ratings.
Just take a look at Gallup approval polls. Just about all US presidents have their numbers go up once out of office. I guess it’s the same with the monarchy; now that they’re no longer chopping people’s heads off their approval numbers tend to go up.
Monarchy is to England what Disney Land is to Florida and you’d have to be stark raving mad to end either one of them.
The UK is a very interesting place. It has a strong history. It’s definitely a fascinating place to travel and experience its beauty. Also, it is a great place to live too. It offers many advantages. That’s why many people are moving to the UK lately. If you’re planning to buy a house, the UK would be a great option for sure. You can learn more from here: https://getgoldenvisa.com/buying-property-in-the-uk