In which I plant the seed of republicanism in my daughter

[cjwatson]

Children's literature and television is distressingly full of kings and queens and princesses and princes, and Judith (6) has picked up rather too much of that for my liking. So, when she asked me something about that on the way home from astronomy tonight, I decided to seize the teachable moment and explain to her how most countries don't have kings and queens any more, and that this is because when you have just one person in charge then what happens if that person isn't very nice?

J: But the Queen is nice. She fixes cars.
Me: Right, but not all kings and queens of this country have been nice.
J (incredulous voice): Reeeeeally?
Me: Really.
J: Some of them didn't fix cars?

Comments

[highlyeccentric]

I prescribe a dose of Horrible Histories - The Terrible Tudors would be a good start.

[ghoti.livejournal.com]

Hmm, she is almost at the age where Benedict started with those, and I hadn't thought she might be old enough. Good call, thanks.

[highlyeccentric]

I wouldn't have thought she'd be old enough but you seem to induct your kids to books / movies / etc much younger than worked for me and my brother (esp me, to be honest. I had a super high reading level but was not psychologically mature to keep up with it).

If the books are a bit above her, the TV show might work? the RUTHLESS RULERS song could be called for here!

[ghoti.livejournal.com]

She definitely prefers younger TV shows; my niece is a big fan, and Judith likes it well enough but not to choose. I think she's probably a while off the books, actually, but nearer than I'd been thinking, if that makes sense?

[jack]

LOL. Yes, I think that's an excellent potted explanation. And I agree, that's basically the point, even if the queen is a nice person, sooner or later an absolute ruler tends not to be. (I haven't decided whether a constitution monarch is a bad thing -- I've started thinking even that is too much, but for a long time I was more scared of the alternatives...)

[cjwatson]

I think a US-style executive presidency is too powerful, but the Irish model where you basically take the constitutional monarchy and elect a largely-ceremonial presidential equivalent every so often seems about right.

If Charles continues his present habit of meddling from time to time, I suspect that a lot of people will start finding constitutional monarchy a bit less benign?

[jack]

Yeah, that seems plausible. I'm scared of electing a president, even a ceremonial one, because it seems hard to get someone moderately reliable, as opposed to "the outgoing prime-minister" or "the celebrity of the year". But I used to be more MORE scared of that than the status quo, but now, yes, I'm starting to think that after Elizabeth leaves the throne, I less scared of that than continuing to roll the dice on inherited monarchs...

Maybe we could compromise on electing the next monarch? :)

[gerald_duck]

To be honest, if I had a kid I'd prioritise teaching them not all people who fix cars are nice people over teaching them not all monarchs fix cars. :-p

[ghoti.livejournal.com]

Missing the point somewhat!

The reason she knows about the Queen fixing cars is because it was a 'princesses can do practical things'; the reason she knows we think the Queen is probably a nice person is because friends of mine who are more monarchy-friendly get confused between dislike for the institution and dislike of the person, so I have to say 'no, I'm sure this Queen is a lovely person, but I still don't approve of the job' often.

[gerald_duck]

Sorry — it sounded from Colin's account as though Judith had managed to reason "People who fix cars are nice. The Queen fixes cars. Therefore, the Queen is nice."