Socialist Live Laugh Meme Abolish The Monarchy T-Shirt

Product Information

The monarchy has been abolished once before, under the leadership of Oliver Cromwell. In 1649, King Charles I was tried for high treason, convicted, and executed. This marked the end of the English Civil War, which then resulted in parliament overthrowing the monarchy and initiating a period of an English republic, known as the Wars of the Three Kingdoms. After 11 years, in 1660, a limited monarchy was reinstated, but moderated by an independent parliament. One must therefore devise a road map that navigates each of these obstacles in a predictable and transparent way. Above all, the entire process must be based on the greatest possible legitimacy: the popular vote. Where do Canadians stand?

Charles III is a terrible choice. Partly because Charles I, the English Civil War’s victor, was overthrown by Parliamentarian Forces. He was executed later. Charles II, his son, was restored to the throne of England, but is most remembered for his rampant womenizing. He had at least 12 illegitimate kids. There is also the Jacobite connection with Charles Edward Stuart (the “Young Pretender”), who claimed the title “Charles III.” The idea that the monarchy can withstand this death, is potentially absurd. It's going to take a lot of engineering and a lot of consideration.The obvious problem with the moralistic approach is that any society, let alone one of sixty-five million people, will harbour a vast diversity of values, as is borne out by recent polls of public attitudes to the monarchy itself. Perhaps unwittingly, Smith concedes as much. He says that the attitudes of the royal family to race are contrary to the nation’s sense of fairness and equity. At the same time, however, he refers to the outpouring of public support for the courtier Lady Susan Hussey when she was accused of racism.

Certainly, Smith is right that demanding a British Republic is not to advocate a replay of the French Revolution, and that we already have most of the pieces in place to create a democratic parliamentary republic. But there is something revolutionary about the spirit of republicanism. As he points out, republicanism is essentially the demand for a true liberal democracy: ‘[republicanism is about] more than replacing one head of state with another—it’s about rebalancing power between government, Parliament, and people. … The challenge is to take what we have and make it democratic, top to bottom.’ Republicans should not be so coy about the radicalism of this project. Worse, the coronation arrests form part of a pattern. At the King’s Accession Proclamation in Oxford last September, one man was arrested for shouting three words: ‘Who elected him?’ Not long afterward, in London, another man was threatened with arrest for walking while holding a blank sheet of paper: he was told by an officer that he would probably be arrested if he dared to write ‘Not my king’ on it. You could also argue that the monarchy was maintained because of Queen Elizabeth II. The desire to abolish it now could only grow with her death. But, it was not immediately thought about what might happen if the monarchy were abolished. She added that Charles has to demonstrate that he can save money and recognize the difficulties people face. This could be a reduction in the number of people on the payroll.

Charles III" does seem like a bad choice, in part because as some on social media have pointed out Charles I of England was defeated by the Parliamentarian Forces in the English Civil War, and was later executed. His son Charles II of England was restored to the throne, but is more commonly remembered for his rampant womanizing, having fathered at least a dozen illegitimate children; while there is also the Jacobite connection to the "Young Pretender" Charles Edward Stuart, who had claimed the title "Charles III."