Republicanism in the United Kingdom

Definition In Great Britain, republican sentiment has largely focused on the abolition of the British monarchy, rather than the dissolution of the British Union or independence for its constituent countries. In Northern Ireland however, the term "republican" is usually used in the sense of Irish republicanism. While also opposed to monarchy, Irish republicans reject the presence of the British state in any form on the island of Ireland and advocate creating a united Ireland, an all-island state comprising the whole of Ireland. Though the opposite stance of unionism is compatible with support for a UK republic in theory, in practice it correlates strongly with monarchism. Legal context Advocacy of the replacement of the monarchy with a republic has long been an imprisonable offence in law. The Treason Felony Act 1848 prohibits the advocacy of a republic in print. The penalty for such advocacy, even if the republic is to be set up by peaceful means, is lifetime imprisonment. This Act remains in force in the United Kingdom. However, under the Human Rights Act 1998, the Law Lords have held that although the Treason Felony Act remains on the statute books it must be interpreted so as to be compatible with the Human Rights Act, and therefore no longer prohibits peaceful republican activity. ==History==

Since the 1650s, early modern English republicanism has been extensively studied by historians. James Harrington (1611–1677) is generally considered to be the most representative republican writer of the era, though John Milton also wrote, among other things, a defence of the right of the people to execute an unjust ruler titled The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates. Commonwealth of England The divine right of kings to rule unchallenged was established as a political theory during the reign of James I, and remained predominant until the reign of Charles I, whose poor rule and Catholic leanings called his right to rule into question. These sentiments culminated in the English Civil War, and after the king's subsequent execution in 1649, Parliament was the only source of power in the newly-renamed Commonwealth of England, though the form of this power changed somewhat in the following years. During Pride's Purge, many members of Parliament who disagreed with the New Model Army were barred from the House of Commons, meaning the resulting Rump Parliament and Council of State (1649-1653) were solely made up of loyalist members. Accordingly, Oliver Cromwell did not have to contend with much opposition to his plans as Charles I did, making the chamber mostly a rubber-stamping organisation. However, not all of his executive decisions were permitted, especially in the ending of the rule of the regional major generals he appointed. In 1657, Parliament offered Cromwell the Crown, which would mean reinstating the monarchy. After two months of deliberation, he rejected the offer and was instead ceremonially re-instated as Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland (Wales was a part of England), with greater powers than he had previously held. The Protectorate was far more autocratic than the Rump Parliament and much like previous monarchical rule. It is often suggested that offering Cromwell the crown was an effort to curb his power. As a king, he would be obliged to honour agreements such as Magna Carta, but as Lord Protector he had no such restraints. The office of Lord Protector was not formally hereditary, although Cromwell was able to nominate his own son, Richard, as his successor. The Levellers were an egalitarian movement which had contributed greatly to Parliament's cause, but sought representation for ordinary citizens. Their point of view was strongly represented in the Putney Debates, held between the various factions of the army in 1647. Cromwell and the grandees were not prepared to permit such a radical democracy and used the debates to play for time while the future of the King was being determined. Restoration of the monarchy In 1660, Charles II was crowned king, ending the interregnum and restoring the monarchy. Following the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the later coronation of George I, power shifted to the monarch's ministers and Robert Walpole. The newly-joined United Kingdom became a constitutional monarchy. There have been movements throughout the last few centuries whose aims were to remove the monarchy and establish a republican system. A notable period was the time in the late 18th century and early 19th century when many Radicals such as the minister Joseph Fawcett were openly republican. American and French Revolutions (1737–1809): "One of the strongest natural proofs of the folly of hereditary right in kings is that nature disproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule, by giving mankind an ass for a lion." To him, republicanism was more important than independence. However, the circumstances forced the American revolutionaries to give up any hope of reconciliation with Britain, and reforming its 'corrupt' monarchial government, that so often dragged the American colonies in its European wars, from within. He and other British republican writers saw in the Declaration of Independence (4 July 1776) a legitimate struggle against the Crown, that violated people's freedom and rights, and denied them representation in politics. When the French Revolution broke out in 1789, debates started in the British Isles on how to respond. Soon a pro-Revolutionary republican and anti-Revolutionary monarchist camp had established themselves among the intelligentsia, who waged a pamphlet war until 1795. Prominent figures of the republican camp were Mary Wollstonecraft, William Godwin and Paine. Paine would also play an important role inside the revolution in France as an elected member of the National Convention (1792–1793), where he lobbied for an invasion of Britain to establish a republic after the example of the United States, France and its sister republics, but also opposed the execution of Louis XVI, which got him arrested. 1851 poem "Our Tricolour" From the start of the French Revolution into the early 19th century, the revolutionary blue-white-red tricolour was used throughout England, Wales and Ireland in defiance of the royal establishment. During the 1816 Spa Fields riots, a green, white and red horizontal flag appeared for the first time, soon followed by a red, white and green horizontal version allegedly in use during the 1817 Pentrich rising and the 1819 Peterloo massacre. The latter is now associated with Hungary, but then it became known as the British Republican Flag. It may have been inspired by the French revolutionary tricolour, but this is unclear. It was however often accompanied by slogans consisting of three words such as "Fraternity – Liberty – Humanity" (a clear reference to Liberté, égalité, fraternité), and adopted by the Chartist movement in the 1830s. Late 19th century During the later years of Queen Victoria's reign, there was considerable criticism of her decision to withdraw from public life following the death of her husband, Prince Albert. This resulted in a "significant incarnation" of republicanism. During the 1870s, calls for Britain to become a republic on the American or French model were made by the politicians Charles Dilke and Charles Bradlaugh, as well as journalist George W. M. Reynolds. 20th-century republicanism In 1923, at the annual Labour Party Conference, two motions were proposed, supported by Ernest Thurtle and Emrys Hughes. The first was "that the Royal Family is no longer a necessary party of the British constitution", and the second was "that the hereditary principle in the British Constitution be abolished". George Lansbury responded that, although he too was a republican, he regarded the issue of the monarchy as a "distraction" from more important issues. Lansbury added that he believed the "social revolution" would eventually remove the monarchy peacefully in the future. Both of the motions were overwhelmingly defeated. Following this event, most of the Labour Party moved away from advocating republican views. It was not until 1937 that the first British polling company was established, but questions about retaining the monarchy do not appear to have been asked by any such organisation until some years later. However, all available evidence suggests that his view remained one shared by a small minority of Britons for most of his time in Parliament. In Crown and People (1978), royal historian Philip Ziegler summarised public opinion on the monarchy in the quarter-century between Elizabeth II's accession to the throne and her Silver Jubilee in 1977: "In the years after 1953 Britain entered the age of the psephologist. More and more often allegedly representative cross-sections of the British people found themselves interrogated about their views on abortion, religion, washing-machines, national politics or pornographic films." He notes that on thirteen occasions between 1953 and 1976, via varying questions, the public were asked whether they would prefer Britain to continue with a monarchical form of government or for the country to become a republic. Ziegler lists the proportions favouring a republic as 9% in 1953; 10% in 1956 (in a Mass Observation Survey); 14% in 1958 (Mass Observation Survey); 10% in 1960 (Mass Observation Survey); 16% in 1964 (Mass Observation Survey); 10% in July 1969 (National Opinion Polls); 16% in October 1969 (NOP); 10% in October 1970; 19% in June 1971 (NOP); 12% in January 1972 (Gallup); 11% in May 1973 (Gallup); 8% in February 1976 (Gallup); 10% in May 1976 (Gallup). The television film Royal Family was first shown in 1969 and watched by a large audience, which may account for the increased interest in the period following its broadcast. Various questions have been asked by opinion polling companies: in the July 1969 survey by NOP, respondents were asked "In your opinion is the Monarchy a good thing or a bad thing for Britain?" 88% approved, with only 5% disapproving. In October that year, the question NOP asked was "Do you think that Britain needs the Queen or not?" 84% answered "Yes", and 16% said "No". Over one in five of those aged 34 and under felt that Britain did not need the Queen (Elizabeth II). The same question was asked by NOP in June 1971. In May 1986, NOP stated that "Nine out of ten people think the monarchy should continue in Britain and only 7% believe it should be abolished." in 2007 The pressure group Republic, which campaigns for a republic in the United Kingdom, was formed in 1983. In 1991, Labour MP Tony Benn introduced the Commonwealth of Britain Bill, which called for the transformation of the United Kingdom into a "democratic, federal and secular Commonwealth of Britain", with an elected president. The monarchy would be abolished and replaced by a republic with a written constitution. It was read in Parliament a number of times until his retirement at the 2001 election, but never achieved a second reading. Benn presented an account of his proposal in Common Sense: A New Constitution for Britain. In January 1997, ITV broadcast a live television debate Monarchy: The Nation Decides, in which 2.5 million viewers voted on the question "Do you want a monarch?" by telephone. Speaking for the republican view were Professor Stephen Haseler, (chairman of Republic), agony aunt Claire Rayner, Paul Flynn, Labour MP for Newport West and Andrew Neil, then the former editor of The Sunday Times. Those in favour of the monarchy included author Frederick Forsyth, Bernie Grant, Labour MP for Tottenham, and Jeffrey Archer, former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party. Conservative MP Steven Norris was scheduled to appear in a discussion towards the end of the programme, but officials from Carlton Television said he had left without explanation. The debate was conducted in front of an audience of 3,000 at the National Exhibition Centre in Birmingham, with the telephone poll result being that 66% of voters wanted a monarch, and 34% did not. At the annual State Opening of Parliament, MPs are summoned to the House of Lords for the Queen's Speech. From the 1990s until the 2010s, republican MP Dennis Skinner regularly made a retort to Black Rod, the official who commands the House of Commons to attend the speech. Skinner had previously remained in the Commons for the speech. 21st-century republicanism MORI polls in the opening years of the 21st century showed that over 70% of the public supported retaining the monarchy, but in 2005, at the time of the wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles, support for the monarchy dipped, with one poll showing that 65% of people would support keeping the monarchy if there were a referendum on the issue, and 22% saying they favoured a republic. In a 2006 feature marking the Queen's 80th birthday, Time magazine quoted MORI founder Robert Worcester on this issue, who called it "the most stable measure in British polling". In 2009, an ICM poll, commissioned by the BBC, found that 76% of those asked wanted the monarchy to continue after the reign of the Queen, while 18% of people said they would favour Britain becoming a republic, and 6% said they did not know. Support for the monarchy appeared to strengthen in the early to mid-2010s, when the Queen celebrated her Diamond Jubilee, and her grandson, who was second in line to the throne, got married in a ceremony broadcast on live television; both events were marked by public bank holidays. Most polls during this period suggesting that between 75% and 80% (and all suggesting at least 69%) of the public were in favour of the monarchy. In February 2011, a YouGov poll put support for ending the monarchy after the Queen's death at 13%, if Prince Charles became king. However, an ICM poll shortly before the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton on 29 April 2011 suggested that 26% thought Britain would be better off without the monarchy, with only 37% "genuinely interested and excited" by the wedding. The same month, an Ipsos MORI poll of 1,000 British adults found that 75% of the public would like Britain to remain a monarchy, with 18% in favour of Britain becoming a republic. At the swearing of oaths in the Commons following the 2017 general election, Republic reported that several MPs had prefixed their parliamentary oath of allegiance with broadly republican sentiments, such as a statement referring to their constituents, rather than the Queen. If an MP does not take the oath or the affirmation to the monarch, they will not be able to take part in parliamentary proceedings or paid any salary and allowances until they have done so. Such MPs included Richard Burgon, Laura Pidcock, Dennis Skinner, Chris Williamson, Paul Flynn, Jeff Smith, and Emma Dent Coad. Roger Godsiff and Alex Sobel also expressed sympathy for an oath to their constituents. The level of support for the monarchy has declined since the 2010s. , the last published poll in which over 70% favoured the monarchy was in 2019. The proportion favouring a republic has slightly increased at the same time, but has consistently remained a less popular position than maintaining the monarchy. Support for republicanism in Britain has ranged from 13% to 34% since the 1990s, with the figure generally remaining above 20% in the early 2020s. The monarchy is somewhat less popular among Black British groups, British Asians, and younger Britons (those under 35); these demographic groups are generally more in favour of a republic. In May 2021, a YouGov poll showed reduced support for the monarchy, with 61% in favour and 24% against among all over-18s; there was a particularly high rise in republican views and an overall plurality for its replacement with an elected head of state in the 18–24 age group (41%–31%). The poll also suggested significant reductions in support for the monarchy in 25–49-year olds, and a slight fall in support among over 65s. In May 2022, ahead of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee, another YouGov poll showed that only 31% of 18–24-year olds were in favour of the monarchy, compared to 66% of the population as a whole. Four months later, in the wake of the Queen's death, this figure stood firm at 67%. However, it has not reached this level since then, and two Savanta polls since King Charles III succeeded his mother have shown support for a republic at over 30%. Aside from a 2022 Byline Times poll (which did not include "Don't know" as an option), these are the first opinion poll results to give figures of over 30% in favour of a republic. Since the beginning of his reign the King has been dubbed "Charles the Last" by several commentators in the context of the ongoing debate about whether the monarchy should continue. In April 2023, YouGov polling found that less than one third of 18 to 24-year-olds were in favour of the monarchy, compared to 78% of over-65s. The anti-monarchy campaign group Republic reported a doubling of its membership since the Coronation of King Charles III that May, whilst its income had substantially increased. Commenting in November that year, chief executive Graham Smith said, "In 2020, our income was £106,000. It was £172,000 the next year; last year it was £286,000. On the death of the queen, we had £70,000 in donations that month. This year, income is hitting £560,000." Support for British the monarchy has for decades been lower among younger people, while older people are more likely to feel that the monarchy is important. In a January 2024 poll of 2,281 UK adults aged 18+ conducted by Savanta, on behalf of the pro-republican campaign group Republic, support for the monarchy stood at 48%; respondents were asked "What would you prefer for the UK, a monarchy or an elected head of state?". This was the first time the figure preferring a monarchy had been below 50% since published opinion polling on the topic had begun. However, according to a poll conducted by Yougov in January 2026, 64% of the public believe Britain should continue to have a monarchy. Protests Protests against King Charles III have included blank pieces of paper, heckling during royal processions involving Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, and egging attempts. A major protest was planned by Republic for the Coronation of King Charles III in May 2023. However, on the day of the event, Republic CEO Graham Smith and five others were arrested by police. They were held for over 15 hours, before being released. The Metropolitan Police later confirmed that no further action would be taken and issued apologies to the protestors, though Smith did not accept his and demanded a full public inquiry. The arrests were made in spite of months of previous discussion about the protests between Republic and the police. Human Rights Watch UK director Yasmine Ahmed said, "This is something you would expect to see in Moscow, not London." Hundreds of protesters assembled in central London that day; it was also reported that 300 people had gathered in Cardiff to protest. A subsequent ceremony in Edinburgh marking the coronation was targeted by republican protesters, led by Patrick Harvie, the co-leader of Scottish Greens and a Scottish Government minister. Chants of "not my king" could be heard inside the venue for the event, which took place in July 2023. In September 2023, republican activists staged what was called the "first-ever" protest inside Buckingham Palace. In a photo released by Republic, protestors wore T-shirts spelling out "Not My King." In a statement, Republic said "The protest is the latest in a series of actions aimed at pushing forward the debate about the future of the monarchy". They said that six of the activists had been briefly detained by security, before being escorted out of the front gate. The State Opening of Parliament in November 2023, the first by a king in over 70 years, was also met with protests by republicans, who booed King Charles as he arrived. It was later reported that Charles had waved to them from his carriage. ==Supporters==

A number of prominent individuals in the United Kingdom advocate republicanism. Political parties , the Green Party of England and Wales, with four MPs in Parliament since 2024, has an official policy of republicanism. The Irish republican party Sinn Féin has seven MPs, but they do not take their UK parliamentary seats as a rejection of UK authority in Northern Ireland. Though the official policy of the Scottish National Party (SNP) is that the British monarch would remain head of state of an independent Scotland unless the people of Scotland decided otherwise, there are individual members who support a republic. Plaid Cymru have a similar view for Wales, although its youth wing, Plaid Ifanc, has an official policy advocating a Welsh republic. The Scottish Socialist Party and the Scottish Greens both support an independent Scottish republic. The Labour Party, the Conservative Party, and the Liberal Democrats do not have an official policy of republicanism. on 6 May 2023 Labour for a Republic is a republican pressure group of Labour Party members and supporters, founded by Labour activist Ken Ritchie in May 2011. It held its first meeting in 2012. It has since held meetings, other informal meetings, and appeared in the media on a few occasions. As of September 2022, its chairman is Nick Wall. The organisation held an event at the Labour Party's annual conference on 25 September 2022, which attracted large crowds, and included The Guardians columnist Polly Toynbee, author Paul Richards, and expert in constitutional law Dr Adam Tucker as panellists. It is rare for a high-profile British politician to identify with republicanism, even among those who campaigned for a republic earlier in their careers. Former UK prime minister Liz Truss was an advocate of republicanism prior to becoming a Conservative MP. Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer was, at an earlier time in his career, also on record as a republican, but no longer identifies as one. His predecessor as Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, although an avowed republican, also stressed that his personal support for republicanism would not influence his policy agenda. The former First Minister of Scotland and leader of the Scottish National Party from March 2023 to May 2024, Humza Yousaf, is a republican. Republic The largest lobby group in favour of republicanism in the United Kingdom is the Republic campaign group, founded in 1983. The group has benefited from occasional negative publicity about the Royal Family, and Republic reported a large rise in membership following the wedding of then-Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles. Republic has lobbied on changes to the parliamentary oath of allegiance, royal finances and changes to the Freedom of Information Act relating to the monarchy, none of which have produced any change. However, Republic has been invited to Parliament to talk as witnesses on certain issues related to the monarchy, such as conduct of the honours system in the United Kingdom. In 2009, Republic made news by reporting Prince Charles's architecture charity to the Charity Commission, claiming that the Prince was effectively using the organisation as a private lobbying firm (the Commission declined to take the matter further). Republic has previously broken stories about royals using the Freedom of Information Act. Media Newspapers and magazines such as The Guardian, The Observer, The Economist and The Independent have all advocated the abolition of the monarchy. In the wake of the 2009 MPs' expenses scandal, a poll of readers of The Guardian and The Observer placed support for abolition of the monarchy at 54%, although only 3% saw it as a top priority. The online magazine Spiked also supports republicanism. ==Opinion polling==

British Social Attitudes survey The National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) has collected survey data on public attitudes towards the UK's Monarchy since 1983, when the British Social Attitudes Survey first asked about this, with the question "How important or unimportant do you think it is for Britain to continue to have a monarchy: very important, quite important, not very important, not at all important, or, do you think the monarchy should be abolished?" Results for the latter answer between 1983 and 2012 ranged from 3% to 11%. Since then, the results suggest a long-term decline in support for the institution, with 2023 survey data showing the number of people who said the monarchy was "very important" falling to 29%, an all-time low. 26% said it was "quite important", making a combined total of 55% believing it was important. This total stood at 54% in the data released a year later, in April 2024. Gillian Prior, deputy chief executive at the National Centre for Social Research, said: "NatCen has been collecting data on the public's attitudes towards the monarchy for over 40 years, and it is clear we are observing a downward trend in support for the monarchy." Graphical summary The chart below shows opinion polls conducted about whether the United Kingdom should become a republic. The trend lines are local regressions (LOESS). Poll results The following table includes all known published polls in which the general public in the UK or Great Britain are asked for their preference on the future of the monarchy. Generally, the question revolves around whether they support the continuation of the monarchy or its abolition (regardless of a republic being specified). The question has been framed in different ways: some polling companies have asked whether respondents prefer a monarchy or an elected head of state. Notes By age == Current monarchy ==

Powers Although royal assent is needed for a parliamentary bill in the United Kingdom to become law and the monarch can theoretically act unilaterally without parliament's permission, in practice the principle of the King-in-Parliament (and parliamentary sovereignty) limits this power. The monarchy functions within the principles of parliamentarianism and constitutionalism, where power is indirectly held by the people. During the Victorian era, it was said that the UK was already essentially a republic, and the phrase "crowned republic" has been used to refer it accordingly. The monarch conventionally exercises their authority in accordance with the will of parliament (in the case of royal assent or the Orders in Council) or the will of the prime minister (in the case of the royal prerogative, which enables the monarch to declare war or deploy the armed forces without parliamentary scrutiny). Influence and partiality The monarch's role has traditionally included the "right to be consulted, the right to encourage, and the right to warn". To this end, the Prime Minister has a weekly private audience with the monarch that usually takes place every Wednesday. They are under no obligation to follow the monarch's advice, but advocacy groups have expressed concern over the secrecy of these meetings, citing instances when the monarch has failed to be apolitical. In 1973, Queen Elizabeth II succeeded in lobbying the government to make an exception in a bill concerning transparency of shareholdings, citing that "disclosure would be embarrassing". The monarch is meant to be impartial. However, republicans argue that the royal family are not, and that there are no real checks on their impartiality. his previous strong stances on topics ranging from GM food to political correctness; and the contents of the black spider memos regarding how people achieve their positions, which were released following freedom of information litigation. For instance, employees of the monarchy cannot pursue anti-discrimination complaints such as those under the Equality Act 2010. The monarchy is exempt from numerous other workers' rights, health and safety, or pensions laws. Republicans also argue that the Royal finances, which are exempt from the Freedom of Information Act, are shrouded in secrecy and should be subject to greater scrutiny. The monarch is exempt from numerous taxes, including inheritance tax, although Queen Elizabeth II did pay some taxes voluntarily. In 2024, Republic claimed that the monarchy actually cost the government £510m a year (compared to £86.3m in the 2024-25 Sovereign Grant). This number includes the revenue from the duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall (£99m), the surplus from the Royal collection (11.8m), an estimation of security costs (£150m), an estimation of potential revenue from using royal residences for commercial purposes (£96m), spending on royal visits by local authorities (£31.9m) and other sources, though their estimates have been criticised in the past for including speculation on potential lost revenue. Republic assert that the Crown Estate, from which the "hereditary revenues" are derived, is national and State property, so their figures do not take the amount generated for the treasury into account (£190.8m from 2007-2008). Large royal events can also involve substantial taxpayer support. In 2022, the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II was estimated to have cost £192m, whilst media estimates for the Coronation ceremony for King Charles III in 2023 have ranged from £50m to over £100m. Tourism In 2010, VisitBritain published a report showing that sites related to the royal family brought in over £500m a year in tourism. This was widely reported as being caused by the continued existence of the royal family, though republicans claim that it is the buildings and the history that are truly responsible for that figure, since tourism companies tend not to use the monarchy in advertising. Brand Finance estimates that the monarchy brings £2.5 billion to the UK economy a year. Forbes instead calculated a figure of £19 billion a year. The members and representatives of the royal family are given titles, and are traditionally greeted in the first instance as "Your Majesty" or "Your Royal Highness", then "Sir" or "Ma'am". Such deference has been called an attempt to keep subjects "in their place". Many republicans further argue that the monarchy is too archaic and reminiscent of medieval feudalism for a modern nation. Honorary military positions Many members of the royal family have honorary military positions, despite not having meaningfully served in the armed forces. In the UK alone, Elizabeth II held dozens of honorary positions as colonel-in-chief, despite her lack of military experience. Some republicans, such as Norman Baker, argue that such liberal distribution of unearned honours undermines them for those who did earn them. Though some royals have been sent into conflict zones, many doubt that they have served on the front line on the same basis as other members of the Armed Forces, viewing it as more of a PR exercise than military service. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (then Prince Andrew)'s presence during the Falklands War was later criticised by the commander of the British Naval Force who stated that "special measures" had to be taken to ensure that the (then) Prince did not lose his life. Wealth The monarchy is in possession of vast wealth and assets. Charles III has numerous royal residences, including palaces, castles and estates. Republicans claim that this means the monarch is not in touch with the lives of everyday people, such as those suffering from the cost of living crisis. Race Since it is still unlikely that a non-white person will ascend to the throne for the foreseeable future, some critics, such as Peter Tatchell, have argued that the monarchy of the United Kingdom is incompatible with the multiracial and multicultural British society of the 21st century, and therefore unintentionally a racist institution. The British monarchy is intimately linked to the history of slavery and colonialism, from funding slave voyages to being the face of imperialism. This has prompted some commentators, such as Kehinde Andrews, to argue that the British monarchy is irreparably racist, being "one of the most powerful symbols of Whiteness and colonial nostalgia". He considers the popularity of the monarchy to be a barrier to white Brits confronting their imperialist past. Prince Harry described an "Implicit stereotype|unconscious [racial] bias" among family members concerning the skin colour of his unborn son, though he distinguished this from outright racism. Effect on royals Members of the royal family are brought up under a very strict code of behaviour. Some republicans, such as the anarchist William Godwin and the author Johann Hari (in his book God Save the Queen?), argue that the hereditary system condemns every heir to an abnormal childhood, and every royal to psychological damage respectively. ==Counter arguments==

National unity Monarchists argue that a constitutional monarch with limited powers and a non-partisan nature can provide a focus for national unity, national awards and honours, national institutions, patriotism, and allegiance, as opposed to a president affiliated to a political party. British political scientist Vernon Bogdanor suggests that monarchies can play a helpful unifying role in a multinational state, noting that, "In Belgium, it is sometimes said that the king is the only Belgian, everyone else being either Fleming or Walloon" and that the British sovereign can belong to all of the UK's constituent countries (England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland), without belonging to any particular one of them. Extreme politics British-American libertarian writer Matthew Feeney argues that European constitutional monarchies "have managed for the most part to avoid extreme politics" – specifically fascism, communism, and military dictatorship – "in part because monarchies provide a check on the wills of populist politicians" by representing entrenched customs and traditions. Feeny notes that, "European monarchies – such as the Danish, Belgian, Swedish, Dutch, Norwegian, and British – have ruled over countries that are among the most stable, prosperous, and free in the world." Thomas Britton writes that elections are always divisive and adding another layer of competition would make a hypothetical presidential election very closely fought, with the results never clear cut. An elected president, as such, would barely represent half of the population, if not then even less. The monarchy, in contrast, is much more popular with the rest of the country. Previous failure A republican government under the Commonwealth of England and then the Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland has already been tried when Oliver Cromwell installed it on 30 January 1649. Yet by February 1657 some people argued that Cromwell should assume the Crown as it would stabilise the constitution, limit his powers and restore precedent. He declined and within three years of his death the Commonwealth had lost support and the monarchy was restored. During the later Glorious Revolution of 1688, which was itself partially caused by disillusionment with the absolutist rule of James II and VII, it was argued by Parliament and others such as John Locke that James had broken "the original contract" with the state. Far from pressing for a republic, which had been experienced within living memory, they instead argued that the best form of government was a constitutional monarchy with explicitly circumscribed powers, which is the UK's current system of government. ==See also==