To be clear I don’t think it will ever completely disappear, but the monarchy hasn’t been relevant for 400 years let alone the last 40, and I see no direction of travel that doesn’t result in it dwindling into what I have described - an attraction, a ceremonial trinket on the shelf to be wheeled out and referred to when we need to feel good about ourselves, or play up to our once ‘great’ times of empire / grease the wheels of some commonwealth country trade deal. Even the concept of the commonwealth seems dated now, and how long will those countries remain loyal to the connotations it perpetuates? It’s more or less there as a ceremonial trinket now anyway. Just needs some fat trimmed away.

Charles is mooted to be wanting to thin down the ‘core’ royal team, as it were, for multiple reasons, one surely to reduce the burden on the state and the optics that go with handing out so many publicly funded golden eggs.

I also don’t think that the monarchy ‘is’ GB. It was, and it helped shape it, but it’s not now. Not by a long shot. Historically and therefore culturally sure, and certainly from a commercial / touristy perspective. But as for an actual cornerstone of everything we do in the modern age? No way. You’re getting confused with the House of Lords, parliament and the financial sector there.

I certainly would not go as far as to say if we ditched the monarchy tomorrow we’d have no identity. Far from it.

We don’t need the monarchy to be a major player in the world. The fact that we barely need them now and we’re more or less doing alright qualifies that enough for me.

They’ll be trimmed down, marginalised and paraded for tourist income. Wheeled out in times of crisis or when people need a figurehead to look towards. Which in some ways is fine. But let’s not pretend that the future role for them and other monarchies in Europe, possibly around the world, will be any more than ceremonial.

In some ways it’s essentially a national charity funded by the taxpayer, that we celebrate once in a while when we need a boost. So long as they remember that a charity lives and dies by its deeds, not entitlement, then they should be fine.

Edited by SW19 CPFC (08 Mar 2021 8.08pm)

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

I'm not trying to call you out in particular, SW19, but you're off target with a lot of what you say here.
I haven't got a telly anymore so I won't be watching tonight's interview. For now, I'll hold back from tearing into Harry & Meghan. It's interesting how they've chosen Hollywood as their refuge. And their chosen interviewer? Well, without going into detail, let's just say she's mucky. And that's being generously kind.
To understand how this modern monarchy is at the very heart of how, not just this nation, but how the entire world functions, one needs to look no further than John Dee (1527-160.

If I got to a pub and get in a fight it might be somebody else's fault however if I go into 6 pubs and have fights in all of them chances are I am the problem meghan has been accused everywhere she's gone by ex husbands family and friends. Maybe it's not cos she's black maybe it's cos she is a c***.

The Lefty clowns on C4 News were earlier alleging that the Palace has a lot to answer for?

The TV news channels, not only the BBC, appear to be dominated by OxBridge editors who rush to criticise anything from the establishment.

The Palace actually has nothing whatsoever to answer for as most of the accusing tripe has been manufactured by the paranoid imaginings of the Duchess of Buggerall.

Please let her and her fatuous partner fade away soon and thank heavens Diana's first-born son was a loyal and intelligent man,worthy of his heritage.

Nothing is fool-proof - fools are too ingenious

He may be worthy of that heritage but it's a fake heritage. He's not biologically Charles's either.

Here's some Royal commentary that's bang on the money...

[Link]

Yeh, just like BLM. Get off your knees.