Swedes: Should we kick out the monarchy?

[Panzar75]

Yeah... I also voted the other way. Very confusing stuff.

 

[Wolfhart]

Spoiler :

Offices and their purpose and authority.

Developed countries normally divide powers between several offices, for many reasons, but balance is an important one. Finland, for example, has a prime minister as well as a president, as do France. Germany has a president and a union chancellor and Sweden has a prime minister and a king. These offices has different purposes in different countries. A prime-minister can do the job of a president and vice versa. A king can above his other duties fill the role of a president and probably with more authority, but a president can't fill the role of a king.

Unification behind fundamental common values.

Some people liked the former prime minister of Sweden, many didn't. Some people like the present prime minister of Sweden, many don't. But both their parties have built their political base on the basic common values that make up the foundation of our entire society. The king is above the political daily jabbering. He is a representative for all of Sweden. He enjoys a 85-90% approval in ratings. How many politicians have such support year after year?

The constitution of politicians and politics

It's not the people that rule our country, it's the individuals we get to choose between every fourth year that do. They are picked by their parties for their ability to promote themselves and run a campaign. Many of them have a taste for power, but are not necessarily the best at wielding power. Actually I have a notion that the more developed a country is, the less competence to be found in the parliament, as the competent leaders will search for more challenging tasks in businesses elsewhere.
A monarch, born into office, may not be the best suited for his/her job either, but will be trained from the beginning to become better at the job, and will never have to be a part of the humiliating or degrading circus that our beloved elective system often turns out to be.

Much to lose economically by doing away with monarchy.

The royal house gets ca 85 million kronor (9 million €/12 million $) every year from the total of our taxmoney, wich is equal to a piss in lake Mälaren. More than half of that sum goes to upkeep of important cultural buildings and institutions. Money we have to spend even if Sweden was a republic. The rest of the money is spent on whatever necessary for the king and queen to do their job, wich is working their arses of here and abroad, for the good of our people. Calculations show that business in Sweden benefits economically from the work that the royals do and so we actually earn money by having a royal house. If we installed a presidential office it would most likely cost us much more and give much less in return.

Much to lose culturally by doing away with monarchy.

We have had kings and queens in this country for more than 1500 years. Some elected and some born into office. Removing such an ancient-old institution would be devastating for cultural reasons. It would be like taking a huge part of our history and throw it in the wastebin, or in civ-terms, like building the pyramids early and then rase them halfway through the game. Only a socialist or a taliban would honestly suggest such a thing.

Amen to every single word! Just wait until they try to impose an EU president upon us...

Edit: and yes, that poll was confusing me too.

 

[Ingvina Freyr]

I thought Caste System was banned

Every single individual in Sweden is free to choose whatever they wish to do with their life. Should the king not wish to be king he's free to abdicate. Should no one in his family shoulder the responsibility we, the people, would choose another man or woman to be king or queen.

Kings are relics of the past.

That comment is as logical as "Horses are relics of the past."

 

[Swedishguy]

Every single individual in Sweden is free to choose whatever they wish to do with their life. Should the king not wish to be king he's free to abdicate. Should no one in his family shoulder the responsibility we, the people, would choose another man or woman to be king or queen.That comment is as logical as "Horses are relics of the past."

But the crown princess was choosed as future queen the day she was born, WASN'T SHE?

OK, I'm obviously not making any sense. I'll spare my arguments to someone that can think about them for a moment.

 

[Wolfhart]

But the crown princess was choosed as future queen the day she was born, WASN'T SHE?

Nope, she wasn't. It took a change in the constitution to make her that.

 

[Swedishguy]

Nope, she wasn't. It took a change in the constitution to make her that.

And that changes everything, does it?

 

[Wolfhart]

And that changes everything, does it?

It certainly doesn't change your point of view, but if you're building that on other such factual mistakes perhaps you should reconsider..?

 

[willemvanoranje]

They should put up her sister.. she's way hotter.

 

[Masquerouge]

A quick question for all of those saying that Monarchy is important for Swede's traditions and cultural values: you guys do not care much that the current dynasty comes from a French General appointed by Napoleon, who did not even speak Swedish?

 

[willemvanoranje]

Then they would have to care as well that the crown-princess' mom is Brazilian-German.. and not Swedish.

 

[Masquerouge]

Then they would have to care as well that the crown-princess' mom is Brazilian-German.. and not Swedish.

But does she come from a royal family?

 

[Wolfhart]

A quick question for all of those saying that Monarchy is important for Swede's traditions and cultural values: you guys do not care much that the current dynasty comes from a French General appointed by Napoleon, who did not even speak Swedish?

Not at all, we do not share those odd prejudices against the French. And anyway: do the British, the Belgians, the Danes or the Norwegians consider their royalties to be German? After nearly 200 years in Sweden it's only the name Bernadotte that's French. The institution of Monarchy in Sweden goes back way beyond that, back to even before we were known as a nation to the rest of the world, and it's this the absolute majority here want to preserve.

Of course, if I had lived in the early 19th century Sweden I might probably mind and be a staunch supporter of the Gustavian party, unless I fought in the war against Russia 1808-09. Then I would be all for importing a Crown Prince that actually knows the basics of soldiering. And then again I would have been gravely disappointed by his decision to go for Norway instead.

 

[Ingvina Freyr]

@Swedishguy: The crownprincess doesn't have to become queen if she doesn't want to. Read my post again (#43). They can always abdicate.

But does she come from a royal family?

There is of course no such thing as blue blood. Nobility lies within your personality and actions. The royal family is actually mainly of German descent, but the most important thing is that any member of the royal family is a person that can represent Sweden.

 

[Zarn]

Clicked on the wrong option. Thanks a lot, you Swede!

I'm non-Swede and No.

Any other option really wouldn't make sense (considering who I am).