What I'd Like To See

[poliphilo]

I'm all for having a head of state who doesn't also lead the government of the day. I think it's useful- both for national cohesion and as a tool of diplomacy- to have a national figurehead who is above party politics.

But I'm against hereditary monarchy. Two reasons: 1. it engenders a flunkeyism I find disgusting and demeaning and 2. it's so random in what it throws up. The present Queen lacks charisma but otherwise does her job admirably; her son and heir is (see last post) a self-centred twit- who is still making elementary mistakes in spite of having been in training for over 60 years.

So, we need a president.  An elected president. And I'd write it into the rules that no-one who belongs to a political party need apply. That would scotch the hideous prospect (which people always raise in opposition to the idea) of a President Blair.

Who does that leave? Lots of people. Soldiers, sailors, diplomats, business people, writers, trades unionists, doctors, nurses, pop singers, actors, all sorts.  The qualifications for the job are charisma and people skills and that's about it. All we require is someone who can represent the nation in public- on the national and international stages- and not make an arse of themselves. If Elizabeth Windsor- a very ordinary person when you peel off the glitz- can make a good fist of it then so can my Aunt Dolly (not that I have an Aunt Dolly).

Oh, and I'd run the elections on TV- with regional heats- as if it were Master Chef or the X Factor- with some sort of preliminary screening out of the hopeless cases. It'd be fun and you'd get massive voter participation.

PS: G.K. Chesterton (in the Napoleon of Notting Hill) suggested choosing a king by universal lottery. That's not a bad idea either. It's wonderfully democratic.

Comments

[veronica-milvus.livejournal.com]

I've said this many times - Michael Palin for president, on the grounds that he's good at being charming to foreigners, and he wouldn't let the politicians take themselves too seriously.

[craftyailz.livejournal.com]

So Tony Blair, Boris Johnson and so on give up their membership of their political party - like the speaker of the House of Commons has to do - you'd still get the same people going for President. At least the Monarchy throws up surprises now and again - Anne for the next monarch I say.

[splodgenoodles.livejournal.com]

As I'm sure you know, we have a Governor-General here as the Queen's representative, and they are appointed by the PM but are not political players, as such.

Curiously, a previous PM, in spite of claiming to be an ardent monarchist, took ceremonial roles on himself and it has, sadly, continued. I'm all for a non-political head of state.

[redatt.livejournal.com]

I don't really see that we do need either, but if we must have one I'd much rather it was a president for all the reasons you list. As well as few others, including the fact that I just simply find the idea of a hereditary job for life unbelievable in this day and age and frankly flat out appalling.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Yes, he'd be a good choice.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

You could be right, but- I don't know- I'd like to think some non-political persons might like to throw their hats in the ring.

I'd want it rigged so that no-one could bring big money to bear on the election.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

You had John Buchan as GG once, didn't you? That's just the sort of person I'd be happy to see as President of Great Britain.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

A nation needs a ceremonial head of state- and I think it's rather a good idea to separate that function from active political power.

The hereditary principle has never worked very well. Most of our post-medieval kings and queens have been nullities- with one or real stinkers.

[glitzfrau.livejournal.com]

Irish Presidents are a roll call of honourable, intelligent people who are a credit to the nation. They are elected by general franchise, and have not yet thrown up a populist disgrace - at worst, some dullards. The system is so successful that it makes all arguments for a monarchy and against a 'President Blair' laughable.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

That was the impression I'd formed. I don't follow Irish affairs closely but whenever an Irish President impinges on my consciousness it always seems to be because they've been doing something right.

[puddleshark.livejournal.com]

I'll wait for the results of the Euro elections before I decide whether the British can be trusted to elect a president...

It would be terrible to end up with, say, Nigel Farrago as our first ever president, though I s'pose he would provide a nice sense of continuity from Prince Phillip.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Farage would be OK- just so long as he didn't allow himself to become overtired....