The undemocratic nature of the monarchy

As a socialist i stand for a class less society with a end to inequality and greed. The monarchy which we have in Britain do not fit in to this new socialist world i'm afraid and as i will explain are simply undemocratic and there above the sta te to rule over us. This is undemocratic and we have little say over who rules us.

there is no place in a democratic society for an unelected institution which possesses inherited powers.

The UK does not have a written constitution which sets out the rights and duties of the Sovereign, they are established by conventions. These are non-statutory rules which can be just as binding as formal constitutional rules. As a constitutional monarch, theoretically the Sovereign must remain politically neutral.

However, the Sovereign retains an important political role as head of state, formally appointing prime ministers, and approving certain legislation. She has other official roles to play, such as head of the armed forces and head of the police, and can be seen as having two roles: Head of State, and 'Head of the Nation'.

In circumstances of a fundamental conflict of interests between capital and labour it is not inconceivable that, under pressure from capitalism, the monarch could refuse to sign an Act which, for instance, nationalised the commanding heights of the economy under workers' control and management.

In November 1975 the Queen's representative Governor-General of Australia, Sir John Kerr, dismissed Labour's Gough Whitlam as prime minister and appointed right-wing Malcolm Fraser as a caretaker prime minister. Thus an unelected vice-regal representative had removed from office a government which commanded a majority in the House of Representatives.

Royal estates are worth big money in terms of rent income. Prince Charles made £1.1 million more from the Duchy of Cornwall estates last financial year than he did the previous year. This money came largely from rising interest rates, the recently departed boom in the stock market, property prices, and rising prices of food from his farmlands.

At the same time, he is paying £5,000 less tax and can afford to run his Aston Martin on surplus wine from English vineyards.

Then there's the trips - a charter flight for the Queen and Prince Philip to the US for six days cost £381,813. How many OAPs get that? Prince Charles and Camilla took the overnight train from Ayr to Euston last autumn and the bill came to £23,949. Well, that's privatisation, I suppose. As for Prince Andrew's trips, even royal apologists find them hard to justify.

The Royals might think of themselves as public employees of sorts, though possibly not the kind that joins a public-sector union. Most socialists would prefer to abolish the monarchy as a clapped-out institution that is used by papers like the Mail to try to justify the growing class divisions of society.

So i feel as do other socialists we simply cannot have a monarchy ruling over us in a new socialist society which we are working towards creating. It is undemocratic and prehistoric in many ways. They must go and have their assets liquaidated to be put to use for the benifit of all the people not a family who are in charge just because they were born to a particular family.