Is There Still a Role for the Monarchy in Modern British Society - Research Paper Example

Is there still a role for the monarchy in modern British society? Introduction The modern relevance of the British monarchy remains a debatable issue, both at the regional level and in the views of the international community. There appears to be rather mixed viewpoints about whether the monarchy should remain intact, due largely to the monarchy’s current role in domestic and foreign political affairs, growing negative public opinion about the monarchy’s lifestyle and values, the pace by which the monarchy has adopted or failed to adopt to modern lifestyle principles, and even from a religious viewpoint. Based on the evidence which is provided in this essay, it would seem that the general public viewpoint is that the monarchy is an outdated system of pageantry and ceremony which no longer has relevance in modern British society. A blend of perspectives In today’s closely-linked global community, the nature by which certain ruling parties conduct political and foreign affairs seems to always be in the media spotlight. With the growth of international trade and with social access to multiple, global media mediums, the method by which international relationships are formed is always on the forefront of the social consciousness. One representative of BBC News cites how Australia views the British monarchy, citing the opinion of Senator Natasha Stott Despoja who states, “The monarchy is simply not relevant to modern Australia” (Grossman, 1999, p.2). This statement comes from a reputable political leader in Australia, a developed country with considerable influence in global trade and foreign relationships. This Senator’s opinion is based on the difficult history between Britain and Australia and the author believes that most Australian citizens are “unimpressed by the pageantry and tradition of the crown and resentful that it is a British face that stares out at them from their notes and coins” (Grossman, p.2). What is being suggested here is that the modern British monarchy still attempts to use their traditional links with Australia to justify routine criticism of how the country is managed and politically-operated. Clearly, in the view of Australians, the British monarchy is so obsessed with showiness and spectacle that it is unable to recognise the attempts of the Australian people to create their own international identity without any links to the crown. Canada appears to have the same viewpoint about the monarchy. According to one reputable Canadian publication, “The Queen ceased being functionally relevant to Canadian politics in 1982” (Prince Albert Daily Herald, 2009, p.1). In December of 2008, the Canadian government was facing multiple issues due to the growing global economic crisis. Instead of the traditional Canadian political approach, which involved consultation with the Queen, Prime Minister Stephen Harper went, instead, to other British figureheads to discuss economic options (Prince Albert Daily Herald). This suggests a strong political shift in how Canada forges international relationships with the monarchy, with the general belief being that many Canadians consider the traditional function of the crown to no longer be relevant to the day-to-day political and cultural development of modern Canada. Much like Australians, the basic view seems to be that the monarchy is an outdated, showy organisation which needs not be consulted in any measurable areas of Canadian identity. This is quite surprising considering that the foundation of modern Canadian culture and politics was built on the values and beliefs of the British crown. Perhaps these international viewpoints are justified by the idea that the British monarchy has been involved in a great deal of international, foreign political scenarios which have given the monarchy a poor international reputation. One political expert describes British philosophy as “racialist”, with the monarchy turning a blind eye to genocide against certain ethnic groups in Africa (LaRouche, 1999, p.2). Historically, the monarchy once exerted considerable political power in many regions which were held under British rule. It seems that many of these values, in regards to pretending that certain social horrors do not exist, are still present in the overall value system of the monarchy. Even former Prime Minister Tony Blair made rather vague insinuations that NATO “should bomb Buckingham Palace” for their stand on negative foreign policy (LaRouche, p.2). It appears that even high-ranking British officials have considerable negative viewpoints about the monarchy and often view the crown as dictatorial in their effort to stay in power. This type of international attitude is also noticeable with the French government just recently denying Queen Elizabeth an invitation for the 65th anniversary of D-Day, which was viewed as a considerable insult to the crown (Glover, 2009). This appears to have been done due to French perceptions of the negative role of the monarchy during World War II, including alleged Nazi collaboration (Glover). It seems that the lack of invitation for the Queen caused such a social and political debacle that the monarchy actually did more to support the growing international viewpoint that the modern monarchy is still impressed with their own splendor and spectacle. Further, just recently Prince Charles was invited to visit Rome and the Vatican to discuss issues related to climate change (English and Pisa, 2009). This visit tended to label the monarchy as being somewhat hypocritical, as this climate change meeting had the Prince charter a private jet which creates a 53 ton carbon footprint in the process (English and Pisa). There is a growing social demand for more responsible action toward preventing climate change, thus the use of a carbon-emitting jet to carry the Prince to the meeting seems to have caused regional and international outcry for perceived hypocritical actions. Would Prince Charles, instead, travel by automobile without the amenities provided by a private jet? Based on a growing international belief about the self-indulgence and pageantry of the crown, it is likely this would not have been explored as a travel alternative due to self-perceptions of social importance. Outside of public perspectives, there is also an element of religious beliefs which would suggest that the monarchy no longer has relevance today. In the Christian faith, it is believed that the British royalty is directly descended from David and are still bound by an ancient Covenant between God and this bloodline. Deuteronomy 17:17 states of this Covenant, “Neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold” (Jahtruth.co.uk, 2007, p.2). It is commonly known that the British monarchy is one of the wealthiest organisations in the world, having accumulated wealth over a vast span of centuries. Those who value Christian beliefs in the modern British society, when referring to the Covenant for the bloodline of David, should “demand that the monarchy give back the wealth it has defrauded the people out of, by using its own illegal laws and taxes” (jahtruth.co.uk, 2007, p.3). It has already been established that many in the regional and international communities believe that the monarchy is too flashy and extravagant in the presentation of their wealth. If the aforementioned Covenant could still be considered valid, then the monarchy would be guilty of breaking the rules of this agreement between the Christian God and this bloodline. For the religious devotee, the monarchy would seem to have created a mockery of this historical Covenant and should opt to dethrone themselves and redistribute their wealth to the people of Britain. However, despite the evidence which paints a very negative portrait of the monarchy, there does appear to be efforts underway to modernise the crown and respond more interactively to the British people. In a recent, highly publicised visit with American President Barack Obama, the Queen was presented her own iPod filled with personalised music and video (Barker, 2009). In an age where technology is a strong social attribute, this public acceptance of modern technologies illustrates that modernisation is something which the monarchy is willing to pursue. Additionally, a once-obscured royal lifestyle is being deliberately opened by members of the monarchy through media exposure, such as developing themed receptions of foreign officials and various televised appearances of the monarchy (Russell-Smith, Francis and Luce, 2007). These efforts at making the monarchy more interactive and relevant to the British society (and abroad) do not appear to be efforts to gain political popularity, rather to make the monarchy more “Diana-like” by being responsive and receptive to the citizens of Britain (Russell-Smith et al). All of these efforts on behalf of the monarchy would seem to indicate that the crown still has relevance in a changing, technologically-savvy society and that the monarchy will adapt their lifestyles to make themselves more outgoing and socially-interesting. Conclusion Despite the best efforts of the monarchy to become more interactive public figures, the evidence most strongly supports the notion that the monarchy no longer has a measurable role in modern British society. This is largely due to the outpouring of negative sentiment, locally and globally, against the monarchy for continuing to harbour values which are not congruent to the broader international community. From high levels of pageantry to poor political relationships, the monarchy should seriously be reassessed in terms of whether it should be dismantled in the near future. References Barker, Alex. (2009). Queen receives personalised iPod. Financial Times, London. 2 Apr 2009: 2. English, R. and Pisa, N. (2009). When in Rome…Prince Charles brings a taste of home as he takes prime cuts of British meat on Italian tour. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1173801/When-Rome--Prince-Charles-brings-taste-home-takes-prime-cuts-British-meat-Italian-tour.html. (accessed 2 Aug 2009). Glover, Stephen. (2009). A diminutive egomaniac, the stain of Nazi collaboration and why the French can’t forgive us for saving them in the War. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1189071/Stephen-Glover-A-diminutive-egomaniac-stain-Nazi-collaboration-French-forgive-saving-War.html. (accessed 1 Aug 2009). Grossman, David. (1999). Race plays its card in republic vote. BBC News. http://www.carliner-remes.com/jacob/Australia-Referendum-BBC.html. (accessed 2 Aug 2009). Jahtruth.co.uk. (2007). The TRUTH about the British Monarchy: The Golden Jubilee (50 year reign) of the queen who never was and the GOSPEL of the Kingdom. http://www.jahtruth.co.uk/britmon.htm. (accessed 1 Aug 2009). LaRouche, Lyndon H. (1999). Blair makes case for NATO bombing of Buckingham Palace. http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/1999/lar_blair_makes_case_2617.html. (accessed 1 Aug 2009). Prince Albert Daily Herald. (2009). Removing the Queen would be a royal pain. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/removing-the-queen-would-be-a-royal-pain-43086122.html?viewAllComments=y. (accessed 1 Aug 2009). Russell-Smith, P., Francis, M. and Luce, L. (2007). What the courtiers saw: The inside story of the great royal fightback. After Diana’s death 10 years ago, some doubted that the monarchy could survive. Spectator. 18 Aug 2007: 10-12. Read More