Republic: Why the UK should wave goodbye to our monarch
Britain's Monarchy is one of the most famous in the entire world, due to Elizabeth the II's rule and their constant media appearances both good and bad. There is a train of thought at the moment that says that Elizabeth might actually be the last proper Monarch of Britain as many in the line of Succession do not wish to take the role, to some this is bad news and that it is the end to a long tradition that those people deem to be necessary even in a progressing society whilst there are people like me who look at the train of thought with some degree of excitement. Republicanism is the opposition to any unelected head of state, eg a monarch regardless of whether it is "constitutional" or Absolute. Republicans want to overthrow the Monarch and replace them with a Democratically Elected head of state such as a President. I want to de-bunk the myths or "reasons" why Britain and so many other countries "need" a monarch, a lot of the reasons given in the UK predominantly by Right wingers are Economical, and on the front of it do make sense, until you actually look at the numbers in the wide scheme of things, here are some of those reasons why they think we need a monarch, and the responses to why those reasons are either invalid or misleading:
1 - "The Monarchy brings in £500 Million to the UK Economy": This point is true until you look at the overarching economic significance of that claim. The UK Economy currently sits at a GDP of $2.6 Trillion, £500 Million or $700 Million in comparison to the overall economy isn't much that's about 0.03% of the UK's overall Revenue. £500 Million isn't even enough to pay for a week's NHS cost (at 2016/17 spending), so in the grand scheme of things they don't bring in that much money, it's such a small fraction of money that if the British monarch vanished tomorrow we wouldn't really see a difference in the Economy.
2 - "They do a lot for Charity": This is also true, but all of us do a lot for Charity, our grandmothers do a our bit for charity as well. Plus, doing their bit for charity is a relatively new thing for the Monarch's they haven't always done that. They kind of have to do charitable work because they are forced to be politically neutral so in some ways being charitable is their way of expressing their political nature without being sided one way or another.
3 - "If we didn't have them it might lead to a dictatorship": I have heard this from some conservatives, the line of thinking seems to come from that every other overthrowing of a Monarchy has been part of some kind of "Left wing uprising" like in the USSR, when the Tsars where shot and killed and replaced with what was a sort of dictatorship. Same thing could technically be said for the French Revolution, however, not all Republics are dictatorships and not all Monarchies aren't dictatorships. Just because one has had very public bouts with totalitarianism doesn't mean the other one hasn't either. We still live in a world where there are Absolute monarchies where the monarchs have absolute control over what people do with their lives and in the privacy of their own homes, perfect example being Saudi Arabia. Even Constitutional Monarchies like in the UK still give a lot of power to the Monarch, like even though the Monarch is supposed to be "Symbolic" they still have power that other people in the country don't, like the Queen still has the ability to declare war without the approval of the parliament, she can't be taken to court, she doesn't have to have a passport and completely veto laws all together.
4 - "They are a representation of British values": I thought that Britain called itself a Democracy and was proud of that fact, if that's not a British Value then i'm not entirely sure what you would be talking about. I have my issues with the way Democracy is run in this county, but for what it's worth, if we are supposed to be a democracy and progressive, the last thing we want is a un-elected head of state that still has more power than the elected parliament. Also the British Royal Family is a deeply religious institution, whilst 53% of the British population are non-religious, there is no point claiming they represent the majority of Britain when the data shows otherwise.
The 5th point that people make is along the same lines as the first, but a bit different. It's usually that they attract tourists that brings the £500 million in, however, i know many many people who have come to the UK and never once has it been for the Monarchy. It's usually for the weather, food, friends, the history, etc. Monarchists seem to think that abolishing the Monarchy automatically un-writes them from the history books, it really doesn't. The Palaces will still stand, the castles and buildings that used to house the royals will still be open to the public, if anything they will be even more open to the public and that will bring even more money in.
The biggest point in favour of Republicanism is that although the Monarch had an important purpose they no longer fit that purpose. Society is supposed to move forward, not drag traditions into the Modern age, we cannot claim to strive for Equality of any kind until we actually have equality across the board, and a good start to that is the abolishment of the Royal family. It is unfair to those on the streets or at the bottom of society to say we are equal when the places the often beg for food are in line of sight of a building that houses a family that is subsidised and paid for, for very little in return. 