European Politics

Earlier David "cherry pick" Cameron opposition (from before the speech):


This was an immediate reaction after the speech. I particularly like it because he points out how Cameron contradicts himself. He cannot have it both ways:

And this he said before the speech: "Europe is not about Europe":
 
A question about the EU and cherry picking ... I am asking this seriously because I certainly follow the EU less than those that live in it. How is what Cameron proposing any different than Poland (for example). My understanding of Poland is that it is a member of the EU, but not on the Euro, but are allowed to do non\-EU-ish things ... limiting who can purchase property for example. Is not the UK in a similar situation (in the EU, not on the currency, and asking for changes/waivers?)

It seems like there are many opt outs/cherry picking that have been agreed to in the past.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opt-outs_in_the_European_Union
 
I never liked Britain's in & out position in Europe but I give him some right. He is defending the short terms interests of his country in the same stupid (or is it clever??) way Germany is doing. Because this is what is all about, Germany is taking too much lead and decides alone. Britain would never accept that and I can't blame him.

Nobody wants a Europe as you dream it, as we dream it, Forostar; either Britain or Germany. Right now I see them as the two faces of the same coin. So in brief, I certainly don't like Cameron but he is in no way worst than Merkel.
 
In other news: Within 15 minutes there will be a speech by our Queen. It will probably be (about) her abdication. She was Queen since 1980.

For the first time since 1890 we will have a King again, soon. More later (with mostlikely: her reason to quit).
 
My thoughts exactly. Plus some of the most 'democratic' countries do have Kings & Queens. And the funny is that open minded people who live in those countries even defend them!!
:nuts:
 
Forostar said:
If you're interested in the question "What does a King or Queen these days?", then I'll do my best to answer that.
Click to expand...
If you mean what do they do, I think in democratic countries they largely preside over ceremonial events. If it's more complicated than that, then sure, enlighten me.
But I am more interested in why nations continue to promote and/or fund the institution of monarchy.
 
They do a bit more. I don't have more time now but will try later. It might answer your original question as well, though perhaps not.
 
mckindog said:
If you mean what do they do, I think in democratic countries they largely preside over ceremonial events. If it's more complicated than that, then sure, enlighten me.
But I am more interested in why nations continue to promote and/or fund the institution of monarchy.
Click to expand...

But you too, have a monarch as a Canadian, isn't it??
 
Royalty these days is a waste of money and the result of a failure in the development of a republican identity, IMHO. Glad to see Beatrix go, sad to see someone following her.
 
In the Netherlands, the role of the monarch is mostly a symbolic one.

But the Queen had a busy agenda. Visiting other countries, speeches, ceremonial matters.
Also until 2010 she was involved with the formation of new governments. This was changes in 2012. She speaks every week with the Prime Minister about the political situation and regularly with other Ministers as well.

Further, there is an economic factor involved as well. Abroad, she can have companies with her, and her presence makes it easier when making business deals.

What I personally valour the most in (at least the Dutch) monarchy is the role of the Queen during disasters such as these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al_Flight_1862
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enschede_fireworks_disaster

She goes to the people and radiates a tremendous amount of empathy, energy and commitment. She shares in sadness and grief. Might sounds unimportant to some but I am always touched by that (I am quite an empathic person myself).

Well, indeed, it costs a lot of money and I am glad that this is more transparent since 2009.
 
I can't see how a non-elected head of state has a place in a democracy. That goes for a Dutch Queen, and a German President. Both our countries suck in that respect.
 
I'm guessing German Presidents are elected from a body ie parliament. It's not like they were born to be presidents.
 
______no5 said:
I'm guessing German Presidents are elected from a body ie parliament. It's not like they were born to be presidents.
Click to expand...

Don't guess, read facts. The German president is elected by an un-elected council.
 
As long as such a head of state has a symbolic role I don't have a problem with it.
This page explains very well the reign (and the limits!) of the monarch, such as their position in the government:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Head_of_State

And this next piece should give more insight on the relation with "the people". Also you'll see how the power and popularity of the monarch changes with the marching of time.

The monarchy in Dutch society

Importance and position within Dutch society
The importance and position of the monarchy within Dutch society has changed over time, together with changes in the constitutional position of the monarchy.

The monarchy of the Netherlands was established in 1815 as a reaction to the decline and eventual fall of the Dutch Republic. It was observed at the time that a large part of the decline of the republic was due to a lack of a strong, central government in the face of strong, centrally led competitor nations such as Great Britain and the French kingdom. After the defeat of Napoleon Bonaparte in 1813 and the resurrection of the Netherlands, it was decided to reform the republic in the Kingdom of the Netherlands with a monarchy rather than the old stadtholder system.

The original monarchy was absolute in nature, with the States-General serving as more of an advisory board without the power to do much against the king. This state of affairs allowed the king great freedom to determine the course of the nation and indeed William I was able to push through many changes that set the nation on the course towards industrialization and wealth. He also established the first Dutch railway system and the Nederlandsche Handel Maatschappij, which would later evolve into the ABN Amro bank. On the other hand, his policies caused great discord with the Southern Netherlands, leading to the Belgian Revolution and a years-long war. A backlash against these policies plus rising fear of early Marxism led to acceptance by William II of a series of reforms, starting with a new constitution in 1848 (which was the start of a continuing series of limitations on royal power).

Direct political power and influence of the king continued until 1890, although it slowly declined in the meantime. Both William I and William II proved quite conservative rulers (although William II was less inclined to interfere with policy than his father was), both resisting major reforms until eventually conflict with the States-General and their own government forced their abdications. William III's reign was a continuous saga of power struggles between the monarch and the parliamentary government (which he forced out a couple of times), plus major international crises due to the same stubbornness (including the Luxembourg Crisis). As a result the Dutch government used the succession of William III by a female regent as an opportunity to make a power play and establish government authority over royal authority.

Queen Wilhelmina was not happy with the new situation and made several half-hearted attempts during her reign to reassert authority. She was partly successful in certain areas (being able to push for military rearmament before World War I) but she never succeeded in restoring royal power. She did introduce a new concept to Dutch royalty though: the popular monarch. Establishing her popularity in military circles through her support of Dutch military prior to 1917, she was able to wield her personal popularity to uphold the government against a socialist revolution in 1917.

Royal power continued to decline until the start of World War II. Forced to flee to London, queen Wilhelmina established the position of "mother of the Dutch state" through her radio broadcasts into the occupied Netherlands and her support for other Dutchmen evading the Germans and fighting from England. She tried to position her family into more influence by giving prince Bernhard an important position in the military, but was still relegated to a position of constitutional monarchy after the war.

Following Wilhelmina's abdication in 1948, the Orange family seems to have settled for a position of unofficial influence behind the scenes coupled with a role as "popular monarchs" in public. As such the monarchs are practically never seen in public doing their official work (except news footage of state visits and the reading of the government plans on Prinsjesdag) and instead their relationship with the public has become more of a popular and romanticized notion of royalty. The queen nowadays is popularly perceived to have a figurehead role, serving as "mother of the nation" in times of crises and disasters (such as the 1953 floods). In addition, there is a public holiday called Koninginnedag, in which the royal family pays a visit somewhere in the country and participates in local activities and traditions in order to get closer to the people.
Popularity of the monarchy
The popularity of the monarchy has changed over time, with constitutional influence, circumstance and economic tides.

When the monarchy was established in 1815, popularity was not a major concern. Still, the Orange family held popular support in around 60% percent of the population following the fall of the French. This changed drastically over the following years as William I's policies alienated the Southern Netherlands, drew the country into civil war and established industries that favored the rich Protestants and not the general populace.

Royal popularity remained relatively low throughout the reign of the kings. William II was conservative, but on the whole did as little to lose popularity as he did to gain it. Economic decline drove most of his popular decline, although popular support for the monarch was still not considered of much import then. William III was unpopular under a wide section of the public, earning himself the nickname "King Gorilla" for his boorish way of behaving.

Royal popularity started to increase with Wilhelmina's ascent to the throne. She pushed for national reforms, was a huge supporter of the armed forces and strove for renewed industrialization. Around 1917 the country was generally divided into two camps: socialists in the cities, royalists elsewhere. This showed in the dividing lines during the failed Troelstra revolution, where Troelstra gained popular support in the larger cities but the countryside flocked to the queen. Wilhelmina was able to muster popular support with a countryside "publicity tour" together with her daughter — this showing of popular support for the queen was instrumental in halting the revolution and stabilizing the government. Still, Wilhelmina remained deeply unpopular in the cities throughout the 1920s and 1930s.

Nationwide support came for Wilhelmina and the monarchy during World War II. Wilhelmina was forced to retreat to London, but refused evacuation all the way to Canada (although princess Juliana was sent there with her children). Wilhelmina regularly held radio broadcasts into the occupied Netherlands and staunchly supported the Dutch troops in exile. She became the symbol for Dutch resistance against the Germans, leading to the term "WOZO" (Wilhelmina, Oranje Zal Overwinnen, or Wilhelmina, Orange Shall Be Victorious) being graffiti'd over all manner of Dutch walls as a sign of resistance. Wilhelmina established popular support for the monarchy that essentially holds to this day.

Although a completely different type of queen than Wilhelmina, Juliana gained enormous popular support in her own right. Starting with her public appearances after the 1953 floods, Juliana established herself as a "mother of the nation" type of queen. A far more homey, down-to-earth character than Wilhelmina, Queen Juliana reigned with a "neighbour and housewife" air about her in a time when the Netherlands went through a period of social relaxation in the 1960s and 1970s (shrugging off the more rigid nature of previous Dutch society). Juliana was also a pacifist at heart at a time when Vietnam was an unpopular war and opposition to nuclear weapons was on the rise. Amid all this, Queen Juliana's alleged socialist views and unassuming nature (she had a popular image of being a queen who prepared her own Brussels sprouts) made her the "right queen for the time" and she maintained and increased the popular support she had inherited from her mother, even in the face of different scandals surrounding her husband.

Popular support waned for a time in the early 1980s, during the start of Queen Beatrix' reign. She adopted a style of government more like that of Queen Wilhelmina and was perceived as cold and distant in a country used to Queen Juliana being everybody's grandmother. Over time the country has got used to her style though and acceptance has grown. This was also aided by the public image of Prince Claus, who came to be perceived as charming and funny during her reign. Particularly his public love declaration for Beatrix a few years before the end of his life endeared him to many people. Popular support for the monarchy (which was only measured regularly since Beatrix' reign) has consistently been above 85% since the mid-1990s and reached a peak with the marriage of prince Willem-Alexander to Princess Máxima in 2002.

Popular support has become more volatile over the last few years though, in the face of seeming improprieties by Prince Willem-Alexander and other members of the royal family during the economic crisis. Prince Willem-Alexander always had a reputation for being a "naughty boy" (he became popularly known as "Prins Pils" ("Prince Lager") after being photographed drinking beer as a student and once drove his car into a ditch while in university as well). Despite ongoing efforts to prepare for being king (including internships throughout society, military service and a very public interest in water management), he has made some clumsy choices from time to time that have negatively impacted his popularity. When he became engaged to Máxima Zorreguieta (daughter of Argentine junta member Jorge Zorreguieta), he publicly defended her by citing a letter describing her father's actions as harmless — the letter turned out to have been written by Jorge Rafael Videla. The matter was set aside when princess Máxima described her future husband's actions as "een beetje dom" ("a little bit dumb") in fluent Dutch during her first press conference (this also established her reputation as a charming young lady in the Netherlands). In 2009 Willem-Alexander and Máxima were in the news again for investing in a vacation resort in Mozambique. Even though there were good reasons to believe the project would have benefited the local populace greatly, the expenditure of money abroad during a crisis in a project involving some shady brokers did not sit well with the Dutch public. Also a purchase of an alternative vacation home in Argentina the same year was unpopular.

In and of themselves the incidents were not terrible, but they became public knowledge around the same time that other questions were being raised about the family finances of the Oranges. Even though the incidents caused only a slight drop in overall popular support (down to about 83%), they led to an increased support for moving to a fully ceremonial monarchy (around 43%), a freezing of the royal stipends (around 66%) or even a lowering of the stipends (about 33%) and removing the royal exemption on taxation (also around 40%).
 
Foro, you're not going to change my opinion on this. I firmly believe high state offices in republics should be elected, and nothing will get me away from that. Sorry to be so harsh; I don't have very many strong political opinions, but this is one of them. It's more than an opinion to me, it's a principle.
 
Not trying to change it. Just informing people who are not aware of all the sides of the (his)story of my country. And it should provide good insight of how it works and how it changes.

I know the real rulers are our ministers, the government, controlled by parliament, chosen by the nation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top