[Rob P]

Isn't that slightly intolerant? We're having a civilised discussion on the merit and worth and future shape of our Monarchy and you want to close it down !

I am guessing this was a reply to @Rob L ?

Rob P

[Loco parentis]

Yes, correct !

[Rob P]

Ah, the old 'not realising you aren't on the last page of the thread' fail

Rob P

[JAFO]

I think the Swiss do quite well. . . . . {snip}
no war in a couple of hundred years or so.

But has profited very nicely from other people's wars.

Well, given the option of living in a nation that made a few quid from the idiocy of others over living in one that routinely sent its youth off to be slaughtered or mutilated in defence of a story, I know which I'd choose.

I didn't always think that way, I guess that I didn't think at all, I just accepted the story. I have changed my mind quite significantly over the years; or, perhaps, I've started to use it.

I believed the story of Queen and country and the glorious dead for a long time, signed up to be part of it, pledged to do my duty and I did. Then, over the years, as friends and acquaintances died or had their lives shattered, I realised that much of what they'd been fighting for was a fairy story; there are no glorious dead, just the dead.

Nations have to build fairy stories that a lot of people believe in quite fervently if they are going to get away with wars. I stopped believing and part of that was no longer believing in the divine right of a person to rule. They're just people like you and me who put their pants on one leg at a time and bowing and proclaiming their majesty is medieval nonsense.

I'm sure that Auntie Betty does a marvellous job, I'm sure that many of the alternatives are worse and that, given the opportunity to build a republic, we could do a worse job of it than just about anywhere. I just refuse to believe that they are anything special any more.

Twenty years ago, I would have been horrified to think that someone thought that way but there it is.

[Bill McCarthy]

I take it then that you would be a conscientious objector if your country gave you the call for any affray, if you had your time over again.

[Propwash]

@JAFO I really don't have a problem with anyone thinking as you do now. Monarchy is a matter of personal choice just as with so many other things, including the decision reached in 2016 about which we must not speak. If we all thought exactly the same about everything it would be a pretty dull world. In a democracy the majority will should, and usually does, prevail. Personally I can't see the necessary growth in support of abolition happening any time soon. If it does it does.

The Swiss are rather odd. On the one hand they house the International Red Cross and on the other happily continued to profit from Nazi money even after the horrors in which that regime was involved had become widely known. Personally I think there are other neutral countries that have higher standards of morality.

PW

[JAFO]

@Bill McCarthy - I honestly don't know, Bill. Fortunately I am too old and knackered for them to ask again so don't really have to worry about that dilemma.

I remain proud of my service and proud to remember those who have served. I like to think that I would still fight for what I felt to be right or for my mates. My views really have undertaken a complete volte face over the last couple of decades and that does leave conflict between what I formerly held dear and how I feel today.

I am not suggesting that I am right or that anyone should share my thoughts, just explaining how I feel and, to some extent, why I feel that way.

Perhaps the conflicts that we have found ourselves embroiled in this century go some way to colouring my thoughts, too.

We are probably straying well off the original question, though.

[A4 Pacific]

I think the Swiss do quite well. . . . . {snip}
no war in a couple of hundred years or so.

But has profited very nicely from other people's wars.

Well, given the option of living in a nation that made a few quid from the idiocy of others over living in one that routinely sent its youth off to be slaughtered or mutilated in defence of a story, I know which I'd choose.

I didn't always think that way, I guess that I didn't think at all, I just accepted the story. I have changed my mind quite significantly over the years; or, perhaps, I've started to use it.

I believed the story of Queen and country and the glorious dead for a long time, signed up to be part of it, pledged to do my duty and I did. Then, over the years, as friends and acquaintances died or had their lives shattered, I realised that much of what they'd been fighting for was a fairy story; there are no glorious dead, just the dead.

Nations have to build fairy stories that a lot of people believe in quite fervently if they are going to get away with wars. I stopped believing and part of that was no longer believing in the divine right of a person to rule. They're just people like you and me who put their pants on one leg at a time and bowing and proclaiming their majesty is medieval nonsense.

I'm sure that Auntie Betty does a marvellous job, I'm sure that many of the alternatives are worse and that, given the opportunity to build a republic, we could do a worse job of it than just about anywhere. I just refuse to believe that they are anything special any more.

Twenty years ago, I would have been horrified to think that someone thought that way but there it is.

Though I don’t know you from Adam, I generally feel that you and I think similarly on many topics? Indeed much of what you have written in the post above I can wholeheartedly agree with. However I take exception on two points.

Firstly, Switzerland have had the glorious good fortune of standing on the sidelines whilst countries such as ours sent the flower of our youth to, quite literally, fight for the freedom of the Western World. (That the Swiss inhabit but with non of the inconvenient ‘expense’!) I too know which of those positions I would take more pride in, though it seems you and I would not make the same choice.

Secondly, since this has developed into an argument over the place of monarchy in the modern world. Do remember, it is no longer our monarch who sends our young to war. That responsibility lies with those we have elected.

Perhaps we should have chosen more carefully in recent years, but where then lies the solution?

America elects a head of state every 4 years. That person is also head of government and Commander in Chief. We’ve had Betty as head of state for the last 70. She exercises a minuscule amount of ‘soft power’. Which system do I prefer? Mmmm. For me, that’s not a tough one.

[Loco parentis]

It is obvious that there is a level of support for the Monarchy. It won't disappear any time soon. Charles himself is on record expressing an opinion that the size of the Monarchy and its extensions should be scaled down to a more manageable and financially sensible organisation. This makes some sense and ensures that criticism becomes muted.

After all how many castles, country houses and estates does the national wealth have to maintain to cushion the Monarchy against a much reduced standard of living ? I think that I can currently account for about ten ! All around cutting back on numbers would be a start. Limiting the numbers of HRHs would make a worthwhile start to the process.

[JAFO]

@A4 Pacific - You make good points and I really don't think we disagree on too much, really.

My talk of war and not monarchy was in response to a particular question about war and, as I said later, diverges from the original question of this thread.

I also mentioned that my thoughts were often conflicted over these things and I agree that standing up to the horrors of Nazism is the right thing to have done; particularly given what we learned later in the war and after it ended. Switzerland's stance on defending its borders in WWI seems fair but some of its actions in WWII seem less so. However, if you are going to believe in a nation then you have to decide what you have defence for? Is it to defend your borders and people and interests and beliefs or is it to stomp around the world telling other people what they should believe? Too often we have been involved in wars that seem to take the latter stance. I agree that it has long been the politician's lie which has sent people to war but, along with that, goes the old lie: Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.

But we have got massively off topic now. To sum up what I think on the topic at hand:

I think it's a bit silly to bow to an old lady in a sparkly hat but if you want to, that's fine by me and the other options for selecting a head of state don't always seem less silly.

[eltonioni]

Switzerland isn't a proper country either.

[Pete L]

No real need for too many spares. Even pre-Brentrance we were happy to import Royals from the continent. Sometimes they even imported themselves.

The family squabbles of the 100 years war, the Civil War and the death of roughly 25% of Central Europeans in religious upheavals points to the futility of most conflict. In our recent history, I'd argue that only holding back Islam at the gates of Vienna was really worth it in terms of net benefit to society - if only for the coffee habit.*

It would be tough to beat the 1st World War as an act of collective stupidity.

*saving the enlightenment was a bonus.

[Sooty25]

I do wonder how long Switzerland would have remained neutral and un-invaded had the allies not stopped Hitler?

[Pete L]

Afghanistan suggests it's not easy to police a mountainous country of many different regional subgroups with doctrinal differences. Although growing drugs from edelweiss may be a bit harder.

The former Yugoslavia also offers a clue.

[Propwash]

In our recent history, I'd argue that only holding back Islam at the gates of Vienna was really worth it in terms of net benefit to society

.

Given what we know about the Nazi atrocities in the various occupied countries I am surprised you see no virtue in fighting the Second World War. Left unchallenged there may have been no society remaining to benefit. Few wars are morally defensible, but I think that one was a major exception.

PW