God save the Queen!

[Warfire]

I think most people who want to leave the Commonwealth after HRH The Prince of Wales becomes King will look more closely at HRH Prince William, Duke of Cambridge and decide they want to wait for His reign. I agree with Shroombuck that Charles will be a great King, his focus on renewable resources and improving the lives of the youth of the UK is admirable and would be a great asset to the country. HRH The Queen has seen more governments pass than I've had hot dinners and her political knowledge and experience is a lot more valuable than many people may realise. Technically every change in Law is signed in by Her Majesty although in reality it is a paperwork exercise, Her insight often guides the legislation especially where it relates to overseas matters.

I, like many Monarchists, will miss Her Majesty enormously - no politician in recent memory since Winston Churchill has come even close to the respect and admiration that HRH The Queen attracts - but HRH The Prince of Wales will be a fine, modern King.

[Costello]

I'm sorry Jesse, but these two are right. HRH The Prince of Wales has shown incredible potential as a future reigning Monarch and in recent years has made an impressive debut into the wider public eye. If you saw the Jubilee concert, he proved he has the ability to command attention, and loyalty. He will make an excellent King.

[Picard]

I believe Jesse to be right. You are not seeing this from the right angle.

Countries that joined the commonwealth decades ago when Britain and the Commonwealth was much more useful and relevant than it is today stay in it for one simple reason: Out of respect for the Queen, no one wants her to live thru the end of the commonwealth. Many countries will not feel this sense of obligation once the current monarch dies.

Over the past forty years we have seen countless supranational organization being formed many of these make the commonwealth obsolete.

Just for Canada as an example. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) (another free trade agreement coming soon with the EU) + Our military alliances thru NATO and NORAD.

You have to understand that despite all the qualities of HRH The Prince of Wales he will have no impact on any of the commonwealth government policies. Him being the ''head of state'' is only symbolic. As I said many have kept the Queen as their head of state out of respect for her extraordinary accomplishments.

All of this remains uncertain but there have been countries in the commonwealth (Australia being the most important) that clearly stated that they will become a republic upon the death of the current monarch. The personal qualities of any successor are irrelevant for this individual has no real power to change anything in any of the countries he serves in as head of state. The death of HRH The Queen will be the occasion for many to get rid of archaic institutions and reform their democratic systems so that one of their own will serve as Head of State. I mean why would they prefer someone as their head of state who might have visited their countries 3 times in the last 30 years over one of their own citizen. This is not an insult to HRH The Price of Wales, it's just common sense.

[Costello]

Jesse is wrong. "No one wants Charles to be King" is a statement backed by absolutely no evidence with all of the British in this thread contesting it. The Executive Committee is welcome to play geopolitics to your heart's content in another thread if you like, I really have no business entertaining it.

[Shroombuck]

I think your judgement is clouded, Picard.

You view this from a republican standpoint. In your opinion Canada should be an independent country. The Empire/Commonwealth is so much more than just a group of countries hurled together by a sense of loyalty to Her Majesty. It's a league of nations that uploads certain fundamental principles such as democracy, equality, the alleviation of poverty and a commitment to world peace. The larger countries such as Canada or Australia may question the underlying importance of the Commonwealth/Empire, but let us not forget that it also includes many smaller countries who - without the Commonwealth/Empire - will be ignored. The Commonwealth/Empire has an important role to fulfil and it certainly has not outlived its usefulness just yet.

Whether Australia will become a republic upon Her Majesty's death remains to be seen. Indeed only time will tell how this ultimately shapes up and whether the Commonwealth/Empire will blossom and endure or quietly wither away.

[Picard]

Jesse is wrong. "No one wants Charles to be King" is a statement backed by absolutely no evidence with all of the British in this thread contesting it. The Executive Committee is welcome to play geopolitics to your heart's content in another thread if you like, I really have no business entertaining it.

In my opinion, Jesse clearly meant that many countries (Excluding Britain - since it is YOUR monarchy) aren't interested to be the subjects of another monarch after Elizabeth II. I find it strange that you both cannot understand this simple concept. Your argument that all British on the forums oppose the view that a foreign country would not embrace your monarch has little weight for obvious reasons. You are British it is your culture and your monarchy it is only natural for you to fully support it. But I do not believe you to be qualified to take the pulse of other commonwealth nations on this matter. To believe that every commonwealth country, and its citizens are enthusiast monarchists as British is foolish.

I think your judgement is clouded, Picard.

You view this from a republican standpoint. In your opinion Canada should be an independent country. The Empire/Commonwealth is so much more than just a group of countries hurled together by a sense of loyalty to Her Majesty. It's a league of nations that uploads certain fundamental principles such as democracy, equality, the alleviation of poverty and a commitment to world peace. The larger countries such as Canada or Australia may question the underlying importance of the Commonwealth/Empire, but let us not forget that it also includes many smaller countries who - without the Commonwealth/Empire - will be ignored. The Commonwealth/Empire has an important role to fulfil and it certainly has not outlived its usefulness just yet.

Whether Australia will become a republic upon Her Majesty's death remains to be seen. Indeed only time will tell how this ultimately shapes up and whether the Commonwealth/Empire will blossom and endure or quietly wither away.

I am quite happy to concede that Canada will not cut ties to the monarchy when HRH The Queen dies. However what is happening in Australia and in other commonwealth countries where The Queen is head of state is obvious and the trend is not about the be reversed by a new Sovereign, quite the opposite actually. And this goes for smaller countries whom have the Queen as their Head of State and for whom in some cases the Queen has not visited in over 20+ years. With all the regional and world organizations being created, with the globalization... the weight of the Commonwealth and its purpose find itself diluted especially in the area of trade, military and economics which are the main reasons why some countries joined it in the first place.

Here two interesting facts to consider:

1. Most of the commonwealth countries do not have the Queen as their head of state. In fact one can remain member of the commonwealth without having the Queen or the British monarch as their head of state. These other countries are for the most part republics.

2. When the monarch dies the successor to the crown does not automatically become Head of the Commonwealth.

I would add that it is more than probable than when the Queen dies quite a few countries will choose to change their constitution in order to no longer have the British monarch as their head of state but will remain part of the Commonwealth (I can easily concede this). Societies evolve and while the commonwealth is a good organization it's best days are behind it. As things evolve and decades goes by less countries will have the British monarch as their head of state not more. The commonwealth was the evolution of British Empire and it's answer to the end of the colonialism era. Since the 1960's countries have reinforced their independence the historical trend is quite obvious.

I do not pull opinions out of my ass, I have studied political science at the University level and while my specialty is the geopolitic/geostrategic situation in East Asia it dosen't make me unqualified or incompetent to address the issue at hand.

Oh and Artful the Executive Committee will say whatever it wants wherever it wants in accordance with the FC code of conduct. Especially in the Entertainment forum where WE in the past have been more than lenient. We are quite content to entertain the constant posts about Monarchy and the great ''British Empire'' all that I ask in return is to be open to criticism, something both of you are often so fond of distributing.

Thank you!

[Costello]

Jesse is wrong. "No one wants Charles to be King" is a statement backed by absolutely no evidence with all of the British in this thread contesting it. The Executive Committee is welcome to play geopolitics to your heart's content in another thread if you like, I really have no business entertaining it.

Blah blah blah

I really do not preach the British Empire at all so do not throw me into the same boat simply because I live here. I am not Shroombuck, I am very different.

I do not care about the educated pontification or political understanding. Jesse's claim that "No one wants Charles to be King" is what I took issue with. Whatever else Jesse said I have not contested and your use of ad hominem as a form of argument ("I find it strange that you both cannot understand this simple concept.") shows an inability to discuss a point of contention. I advise against it in future.

Picard, this has been an opportunity for you to prove how much you know, just as it has been an opportunity for Jesse to take the not-so-serious enigmatic approach. Textbook for both of you, but if you are British, you want Charles to be King. It is a preeminent view in Great Britain.

As for the rest, debate the Commonwealth all you like. I have little understanding of it, it doesn't seem to have much of a tangible impact. Go on, don't stop on my account.

[Kaito]

Guys Guys - To Heavy....

Neil

[Picard]

Jesse is an intelligent individual and you should try to read between the lines, he obviously know that Britain is pro-monarchy and support Charles as a future king. Your failure to understand that he was talking about the international context puzzles me.

Bottom line is don't mention me/Executive Commitee in your replies if you are not interested to have an intelligent discussion on the subject at hand.

It's not about how much I know, it's about posting a fucking relevant post for a change instead of trying to demonstrate who has the bigger e-dick. I like those discussions and elaborated on what I thought was the subject at hand.

If you don't read people's posts and see how the discussion evolves then don't bother. This became about the commonwealth, and it was not my doing. I obviously attributed you positions you did not have. So it's a misunderstanding.

[Costello]

Jesse is an intelligent individual and you should try to read between the line, he obviously know that Britain is pro-monarchy and support Charles as a future king. Your failure to understand that he was talking about the international context puzzles me.

Bottom line is don't mention me/Executive Commitee in your replies if you are not interested to have an intelligent discussion on the subject at hand.

It's not about how much I know, it's about posting a fucking relevant post for a change instead of trying to argue who has the bigger e-dick.

I have an agenda, that would explain your puzzlement.

Correct, it is about telling others how much you know. Your personality type is always about being number one, so don't pretend otherwise.