This week we will be exploring the roles and responsiblities of the British Parliment. As discussed Friday, the leader of Parliment is the Prime Minister, and it is he or she who is essentially the exectuive leader of Great Britain. The Queen, however, remains the Head of State of the United kingdom and over a dozen independent commonwealths. Your blog this weekend asks you to analyze the changing and contested role of the British Monarchy in the modern world.
Directions: Actively read the articles below:
How the Commonwealth sees the Queen:
The Queen admits monarchy must evolve to survive:
2. Summarize each article providing insight on what powers and influence the Queen has on British politics and culture.
3. Based on the articles, how has the Queen's political and cultural role and influence changed in recent history? Refer to at least three nations and multiple perspectives in your response.
Blog due Tuesday, November 11 (Veterans day- no class)
250 word minimum.
You may post, email, or print your response
9 comments:
Justin Lefkowitz
C Block
Both the article from BBC and the article from The Independent give good views on how people see the role of the Queen from British Commonwealths around the world and Britain.
The first article, “How Commonwealth Sees The Queen”, discusses how people from the different British Commonwealths view the British Monarch. This article from BBC reflects on the Monarch from the perspective of Canadians, Nigerians, Kenyans, Malaysians, Australians, Indians, and Caribbeans. The majority of these Commonwealths see the Queen as a highly respected figure. According to a reporter from Nigeria, “With her (the Queen) age, experience and wisdom she is an untapped resource in terms of statesmanship.” According to people of the Caribbean, the Queen is a terrific symbol of sobriety and respect, especially in the light of the behavior of some of her children or grandchildren.
On the other hand, some people from Canada respect the Queen, but they really couldn’t care less for what she does. This is mainly because many Canadians are immigrants from European countries who disliked the Queen of England. When a Canadian reporter stopped a twenty something couple on the streets of Toronto to see what the Queen meant to them, they responded in a dumbfounded manner saying, “She’s on our money?”
The article from The Independent, “The Queen Admits Monarchy Must Evolve To Survive” by Ben Russell, discusses the views of the Queen on the role of the Monarchy if England wants to better itself as a nation. In her golden jubilee address to Parliament at Westminster Hall on May 1st, 2002, the Queen reflected on how England has changed so many times under her reign. During her speech to both, the Houses of Lords and Commons, there was speculation that the Queen was just going to say that England should just dispose of the Throne, rather than just let it rumble on.
The Queen is a large influence in not just Britain, but almost all of her Commonwealths as well. Although she technically speaking only has the power of executive privilege, she also has the power to influence. She influences the way that the people of British society think. If she feels one way, the majority of the British people will feel the same. This is why she is so powerful. She really is the voice of the British. Whether she can pass laws or not has no say in her power. If she really wants a law passed, she will get it passed as a result of her influence on the people and on Parliament. If the people of Britain want to have a say in their political system still, they need the throne to keep evolving as a nation and a superpower.
Farooq Hussain
C-Block
In the first article the writer analyzes the queen’s influence and importance in some of the most important commonwealth nation where she has ruled for many years. Queen Elizabeth has been a symbol of respect, influence and pride in many commonwealth nations. These nations include Canada, Australia, The Caribbean, India, Kenya, Nigeria, and Malaysia. To sum up the first article, the queen has ruled fairly in many of these former colonies, and received much reverence and wealth from them. However, now theses nations have evolved much on their own, no doubt that the queen has layer the foundation for them, but now they are becoming more and more independent of the crown. Reason being that the history between these countries and the royal crown has faded to a mere custom.
Although the Australian holds much respect for the queen, they do not feel the same about her son, Prince Charles. They do not view him as the best successor of the throne. In today’s world many young Australian do not even recognize the monarch as significant, many do not even bother to care much about it. In some nations there has been some conflict between the nation and monarch. Such as India, know a well developed nation, many Indians do not share the same reverence their ancestors had for the crown. Some go as far as to resent them, as the past has been shaded with many battles, conquests and revolts. As the article quotes “….many others say that colonial rule is a dark chapter in Indian history that must quickly be forgotten.”
In Canada, many youngsters do not even know much about the queen. There is a constant divide between the older and younger Canadians, who want to keep the monarch and those who give it much less thought. In some countries such as Kenya, Nigeria, and Barbados, the queen is still much revered. The nations still recognize her as head of the state and wish to keep the custom alive, yet some cannot help but frown upon the past and future of the crown. The common response from most of the nation’s youths is a vote of either no confidence or no concern.
This has been recognized by the queen and in an address to both houses where they congregated at Westminster hall. She stated that in order to rekindle the respect and popularity of the crown it must evolve and renew their approach. It must become more than a symbol and reach out to the younger generation. This can only be done be reevaluating the values and customs which have been part of the monarch for many years.
The queen’s role has been reduced to one of a symbol and a mere tradition. It has been given powers, not limited however they do not come close to the standard it once was. The monarch is the head of the state in many countries, such as Canada, Australia, and Kenya. Furthermore, the queen may not make laws however she has an important influence in the process of legislation. Her opinion is one that is shared and respected by many. It also has a significant impact on the decisions of parliament. I would agree with Justin, and like to say that the monarch is neither an excess nor a burden, however it must evolve and change to keep up with the change that has come about in the world and the commonwealth.
QUELMI
BLOCK C
The article "How Commonwealths see the Queen" from the BBC website talks about the position of the Queen of the U.K. and the issue of Commonwealths. The article takes a look at how the monarch is viewed and looks at her rule in many nations. The second article "The Queen admits monarchy must evolve to survive" by Russell talks about the Queens views on parliament and monarchy and what needs to be changed. Queen Elizabeth II speaks of constant change over the past half century and points out the "long and proud history" which provided a "trust framework of stability." Each of these articles show what powers the Queen possesses and her influence on British Politics and culture and the appointing of officials.
Many may think considering that she is royalty she may have a certain amount of power. For any law to be passed it must be signed by Queen Elizabeth II. But in places like the commonwealths, overseas territories her power may be legally limited. She has the power to sieze land and pass laws as the Constitutional Head of State and appoint Governor generals who decides on the Prime Minister and has power to overthrow he/she. She is also viewed as a Constitutional Figurehead because even though she may be the Queen of Australia, Jamaica, ect. these are all independent states.But she seems to have a decent influence in many places like detailed in the first article. She is a major influential figure in Canada, The Caribbean, Nigeria, Kenya, india, and Malaysia. Often she may be referd to as a Key Figure in some of their political History.
ellllooo,
The Queen is getting older; thus, people are pending when she will step down, which would pronounce Prince Charles as king. Over time, Queen Elizabeth as gained respect in Australia, since she has been vital in their political history. This is unique, given Australia is a republic country, dissimilar to a monarch with one overall ruler, by being ran by the people with appointed officials. However, she has gained much of their respect and admiration due to the strength and security she has furnished the Aussies with, especially since she basically is the check and balance system for Australia. On the contrary, it seems unlikely that Prince Charles will get the same respect Queen Elizabeth has worked up. They same feelings of respect and appreciation for the Queen are shared in Canada as well. However, some Canadians don't acknowledge what the Queen has done as their head of state, especially since they broke their sanctioned ties with the UK in 1982. These people see that the Queen is their head of state by law, but are really governed by their own governor-general. In actuality, both hold the same titles. Each Canadian have their own view, or no view at all of the Queen. As the years go on the Queen is less regarded. It seems that the monarch will go on without question, since there is no problems occurring with it, that is until the Prince steps in the reign. Moreover, the Caribbean esteems the Queen as a key figure, since that have under gone much change since WWII. Although many islands of the Caribbean have gone republic, they still recognized the Queen as their head of state. They see her as very reassuring and secure figure. However, like other nations man of the islands see the Queen is far off their minds. The English traditions and language will remain in the Caribbean, but the viewing as Britain as their head country is no more. They view her a symbolic role model for respect and sobriety. Similar to the other nations, they respect the Queen, but not the monarch. Many predict that after she steps own form the throne things will change. On the contrary, India rarely esteems the Queen, since India has undergone much change by becoming a Monarch. Many of India's people see the British rule as the gloomy, but many regard the British for instituting their parliament and legal system. Kenya is similar to Canada, where the Queen's recognition is fading with each generation. However, affection in Kenya is strong, especially since that is where the Queen had learned she'd become Queen, so I'd think there'd be strong ties there. Some Kenyans smile with the mention of the Queen. Others are angered since many people have died under her monarch rule, due to the Mau-Mau suppression. In Malaysia, the people that know of the Queen adore her, especially since they fought together against Communism. But Malaysia is independent from Britain, and they young generations rarely know of her, but know talk more of her grandchildren. Nigerians highly regard the Queen, but don't exactly follow her. Due to her wisdom, and experience, they regard her as a great tool.
The Queen addressed that times are changing, and if Parliament and the Monarchy want to do any good for the people, they must advance their thinking, especially since the old wisdom of the Queen won't be around forever. She praised how Britain's multitasking of being traditional in fairness, but also becoming muti-cultured and multi-relegious. Also, that Britain is able to handle it so peacefully. She gave recollection of the trusted and stable basis she has formed, over a long and satisfied reign, and hopes it continues. Thus, those are reasons why the monarchy and parliament must advance and keep up with the times, to insure unity and respect. The Queen's words sparked into the listeners of the Parliament that they must not wait, and must take action now. Included in the Queen's speech was the fact that she would not step down from the throne. However, many people see a con to that, being people predict Prince Charles is to be one of their greatest kings, but he may not see the throne for long. She sees the change occurring in the world, and realizes that it could be good or bad, it just all depends on how one takes it. Throughout her reign she has lived through the end of the Cold War, the European Union growth, the Commonwealth up-bringing, and currently terrorism.
I don't believe the role of the Queen has changed, but it's more-so the people. As time goes on, and as the Queen gets older she seems to fade in peoples minds, especially since she is over seas, and has been their leader for over 50 years. I think that if we had a president for over 50 years we'd forget about him too, especially since the world is becoming so fast paced, and have many other things occupying their minds such as the media, rather then something that controls you. When I think about it, I found it to honestly be quite sad, but in a way it's not the people's fault, since technology keeps coming up with foolish things to occupy one's mind. Anyway, the dwindling of the Queens candle is evident in Canada, whom merely regard the Queen as someone on their money. In addition, the younger generations aren't familiar with the Queen, but more-so her grandchildren since they see the Princes in the media tabloids. In Caribbean, the Queen has become more of a role model, rather than a leader. This is due to the comparison between her and her grandchildren, since she is seen as a person of respect and sobriety. I completely agree with Farooq, on the discussion of the Queen becoming more as a symbol, and someone on money, rather then an actual political leader. It seems that the Queen, at least of those whom regard her, see her as a respectful and admirable person. Also, they regard the monarch as something that doesn't really effect their way of living. Thus, I also agree with Justin, in the way that the monarch neither suppresses or advances any of the Commonwealth nations.
xoxo,
kg
kimberly gangemi- a future princess
Christopher Morawed
In Australia’s recent political history, Queen Elizabeth has been a key figure. They believe that she has a power that will keep others from attaining ultimate power. In Canada the Queens 80th birthday will be celebrated with best wishes. The original united Empire loyalist approve of her the most. The feelings towards the Queen differ mainly on where you are asking. Provinces like the United Empire will feel one way where as other regions might disagree. The French refer to her as the best. Each common wealth think differently of her but mostly
The second article speaks of how the Queen admits to having to make a change for the nation. Her exact words were that she vowed to serve the nation “through the changing times ahead”. Her speech was so powerful that it arose talk about reforming the monarchy because of the Queens speech. The way she moved many which also moved me was with this powerful line that states "Change has become a constant; managing it has become an expanding discipline. The way we embrace it defines our future."
Gerald Lara
C Block
Both articles show the people's views from both the nation of england and her commonthwealth members that in this changing world, monarchy is not the way. They also show the great deal of influence the queen has upon nations.
In the first article, "how Commonwealth Sees the queen", shows a great division of how each commonwealth nation feels about the monaristic ways of great britain. inspite of their feelings toward the idea of monarchy, they still all show great respect and pride toward the queen. This articles relfects on their opinion of how they feel about following the rules of England. Some feeling strongly about her prescence in their contry, and some could careless of what she does. Though monarchy created a pathway for each of the commonwealth nations, some feel they are stong enough to run their country by their own rules.
In the other aticle, "The Queen admits monarchy must evolve to survive", it talks about the english and the queen agreeing the need for reformation.The queen even stated that reforming is needed "through the changing times ahead". To evolve into independent nations can create more equality and less monarchy is what is being said for this reformation.Though some of the queens comments has been considered radical, her comments predicts only what she feels is true.
The queens role has changed in recent history. Before Englad in general was hated from its take overs and indutrialization of many nations. NOw the queen has major influence aspecially in many english speaking countries. In austrailia there is a sense of pride of having the queen there than any other leader."There is a sense of affection towards the Queen," said Susan Ryan from the Australian Republican Movement." Though her influence has its positives, it also has dead zones in other nations. Her influence in nigeria is reduced to nearly nothing. "For most Nigerians, the British Queen has little relevance to their lives." In some nations hatred is felt against the queen which could be defined as influence, but not good influence. in kenya, the hatred toward her is strong, yet she influences that anger even from a different continent. "But Kenyans look back on the final 10 years of British rule, her first decade as Queen, with anger."
THe queens rule has mny different influences acrooss the world, yet should dismantl her monarchy in nations to let the freedom of democracy run through the nations. Monarchy hold back every nation England forces to obliged their rules, and therefore prevents evolution.
Anthony Fontana
In the article, “ How Commonwealth sees the Queen,” is about how all commonwealths of Great Britain view the queen. A majority of commonwealths see the queen as a figure of righteousness and she stands for wisdom and tradition. Some see her as “beacon of stability.” While on the other hand some view the Queen as powerless and “as a symbol of English-Canadian dominance.” A Caribbean reporter stated, "Whether you belong to a rapidly dying breed of monarchists or militant advocates for constitutional republics, it is simply difficult not to admire the Queen for her perpetual calming and enduring presence."
In the other article, “The Queen admits monarchy must evolve to survive,” the Queen addresses parliament and talks about the need for reform. Her speech went on about how the British Monarchy and parliament needed to change together to brace for the future and “changing times.” This speech seemed to be like the Queen was asking for more power to be given to the monarchy.
The Queen is simply just a figurehead and symbol of repression. The monarchy is a way to hold on to Britain imperialist and oppressive past. Giving more power to the monarchy would be such an undemocratic thing to do. If any one person has absolute power the government can easily become corrupt and function negatively towards the majority of the citizens.
Justin- E: thoughtful, detailed and enjoyable to read.
Farooq- E: Detailed, well executed comparison of examples.
Quelmi- G-: Solid summary but you don't really explain the Queen's role in commonwealths of the UK and your analysis is rather general.
Kimi- G: Your blog is verbose, but nearly to a fault. Your main ideas get lost in all the detail. Overall, nice work but a bit disorganized.
Lo- E: Thoughtful and detailed.
Chris- S: Analytical but too concise. Please try to write more.
Gerald - E: Insightful comparison. Good use of text-based references.
Anthony- G: Accurate but a bit short. Try to write more, you were moving towards interesting insights but didn't elaborate to your full potential.
Post a Comment