This post is a bit more opinionated but I have attempted to link my view to economic and political issues. I came across this question after watching an Oxford Union debate: ‘This House Believes Monarchy Is Mere Celebrity’. I agree wholly with this statement as monarchs can be greatly compared if not categorised as celebrities. This is not the historical position of monarchs as they were seen to have absolute power and be the leaders of their kingdom or country. The role of monarchy has become somewhat useless to society and is now merely  a form of entertainment for society and not a benefit. In this essay I will mostly focus on the British Royal family and argue how they do not aid much economic and political progress but in someway hinder it and how the role of the monarch can easily be replaced or removed without affecting society negatively.

Traditionally the role of monarchs has been to govern the land and ultimately act as the prime minister of the country. Yet today the remaining monarchs have little political power and the political/ economical impact they do have can be seen as detrimental to society. In the Uk, the King is deemed the Head of State and he represents the country on foreign affairs. The King does not have any political role but is merely present to “ act as a focus for national identity, unity and pride; give a sense of stability and continuity; officially recognise success and excellence” Whilst these actions do help to maintain the status and power of the country, in modern day society, such actions are not as important as having a strong economy, effective political system and good relationship with other nations. These attributes are not able to be fully fulfilled by the monarchs but instead a figure such as a President is able to do so. Looking at other countries such as America, the President has the power of both the monarch and a prime minister which is clearly sufficient considering that the USA is one of the world's most powerful and prosperous countries in the world. Despite the state of the UK being almost on par with the USA, our comparably smaller nation may be much more influential if they abolished the monarchy and had a more powerful leader in place. Furthermore, monarchs burden the country economically as well due to them receiving a sovereign grant from the government which provides the royals with a source of income. This money often comes from taxpayers which can be seen as unjust due to the little impact the royals have on society so arguably this grant is not fully justified. Thus without this fund going towards the monarchs it would free up more money which can be used to benefit the economy as a whole. Evidently without the monarch the country would be able to prosper more financially and economically and an effective replacement is able to be found, e.g. a president, highlighting the minimal benefits the monarchy has in today's society.

Furthermore, Royals are not beneficial to society due to the media constantly reporting about the Royals life which does not bring any real advantage to society.. The Royals are greatly in the public eye with the majority of their lives carefully monitored by journalists and the press. Headlines in national newspapers inform society on drama or great changes in the royal's lives such as Kate Middleton announcing her diagnosis of cancer. News about the royals has been occasionally prioritised and even published instead of political and economic news. With the royals clouding information like this,  it can mean wider society is misinformed and this can have negative consequences such as people not knowing that inflation has risen above the target 2%. Celebrities as infamous as the Royals such as Tom Hanks, do not have their affairs published as headlines in national newspapers so it is not just that the royals do. The role of royals can be greatly likened to that of other celebrities and their lives/ actions do not profoundly affect all of society, but only interest a minority of royals fans. Therefore royals are not beneficial to society as they prevent society from being informed about much greater more pressing issues that directly affect them.

It can be argued that the Royal family preserves culture and traditions which are beneficial to society. The monarchy holds many British traditions such as Jubilees and coronations which are national events. Their presence at many events such as football matches and derbies adds prestige to them and the fact that Britain has a monarch is well known across the world attracting tourists to Buckingham palace and makes British culture stand out. This is good for the country as more tourism increases economic growth in the country. In addition a monarch is able to preserve and encourage nationalist sentiments and also remind people of the history of Britain. Monarchs were in power since the early 13th Century in England so by them retaining their status it ensures the legacy of past Kings and Queens of England is preserved instead of forgotten about. This legacy is partly maintained through the monarchs still being seen as role models and doing charitable work which encourages others in society to do so. Alongside multiple people benefiting from the visits, donations and endorsements they provide through charitable work.

Whilst this is all valid, it is still possible to maintain strong traditions and culture without a monarch. Many countries are able to do so successfully such as Germany with its many annual cultural events such as Oktoberfest which is even celebrated in other European countries. Furthermore, countries also celebrate their independence such as Thanksgiving in the USA which establishes more nationalistic ideals. Whilst England was never occupied by another country, there is a chance for the creation of national holidays such as one on the day that England abolishes the monarchy, if it happens. Therefore Britain is still able to enjoy the benefits of a monarchy without one. In addition it is becoming increasingly so that monarchs are not deemed perfect role models. The creation of the show ‘The Crown’ depicts the life of the monarchs which was once behind closed doors. Exploitation and manipulation is portrayed as common in this series, possibly changing people's views of the family. The creation of entertainment about the monarchs has increased people's interest in them but this may mean that if the monarchs were to go then people would still remember them and think of them but also have much greater benefits. There have also been multiple rumours and scandals that have occurred such as Prince Andrew being named as a sex offender which highlights how the royals are increasingly being seen as bad role models.

Overall, the royals are beneficial to society to a limited extent due to them adding little to the economic and political side of society but instead worsening it. Monarchs do have a key role in preserving culture and doing good for society in the form of charitable work but this can be easily replaced by the role of a powerful figure such as a president. There are countries across the world that are powerful, culturally rich and have many traditions but don't have a monarch. Thus it is possible for Britain to follow suit and gain many extra benefits. Evidently Britain is able to live without the monarchy so the benefit they bring to society is minimal.