Alternativer Bildtext:

typical of British people represents the British spirit → Lifestyle SHOULD THEY ABOLISH THE BRITISH MONARCHY ? YES, THEY SHOULD - the royal family is cost-intensive (representation of the family is expensive); but: they have gained a lot of money through all thousands millions tourists - British taxpayers loose a certain amount of money in Britain's monarchy; but: an alternative elected head of state would not be cost-free either - having a queen as head of state who has inherited her title would be incompatible with democracy → Britain might be one of the countries in Europe that still has a monarchy but at the same time it's the oldest democracy in the world → the queen has only very limited powers and mostly representational functions →→she embodies British stereotypes and helps symbolizing Britishness and national values - no separation between state and religion, tied to the church - arrogant and snobby family The Queen - has no overt power but is formally part of the government system she is... head of state ... a symbol of national unity important function appoints the Prime Minister > by inviting the leader of the majority in the House of Commons to form a government - represents the country at home and abroad NO, THEY SHOULDN'T - Britain is known for its royal family - change is difficult to manage - 68% of British inhabitants think that the institution of the monarchy os good for Britain - Why should we abolish something that is accepted and loved by most of the Britains? - makes Britain different from most other countries - good for charity/ the royal family does a lot of charitiy - British monarchy attracts tourists which is an economic factor and part of the entertainment industry - Queen is a well-respected person - would ruin the nation' tradition/loss of traditions - monarchy costs only a few cents for each taxpayer - keeps the people interested in history