Tradition and History

It is often said that we should keep the monarchy because it is a great British tradition. This argument doesn't stand up to much scrutiny for two very good reasons, much of the 'tradition' of the monarchy is a modern invention, and our greatest traditions are celebrated by republicans, not monarchists.

Counterfeit Tradition

Many of the things that now count as 'ancient' royal traditions were invented in the relatively recent past.

The royals are adept at giving the impression of tradition for PR purposes. The honours of OBE, CBE and MBE, for example, are less than a hundred years old. The title of Queen Mother was created just for Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, in order to suggest a continuing constitutional role after she ceased to be Queen. Even the custom of a hereditary monarch is relatively recent; of the 33 monarchs between William the Conqueror and Queen Victoria, only 13 succeeded by straightforward hereditary right.

Perhaps the most notorious example of all is the investiture of Charles as Prince of Wales. The ceremony was carefully designed by the photographer Lord Snowdon to stifle burgeoning Welsh nationalism. The 'ancient' ritual was in fact a perfectly stage-managed propaganda event.

Republican Tradition

Perhaps more significantly, this argument assumes that tradition is not important to republicans. In fact, the opposite is true.

Republicans believe that the most honourable British tradition of all is a radical tradition: the tradition of questioning traditions. Constitutional innovation and reform are just as crucial in British history as the monarchy. Take, for example, the Magna Carta of 1215, the 1689 Bill of Rights, the Great Reform Act of 1832, and the introduction of universal suffrage in 1920 - all pioneering political advances.

Since the earliest days of recorded British history, we as a nation have aimed to curtail the power of the monarchy and expand the power of those with the greatest stake in the welfare of our country - whether medieval Barons, or, in the democratic age, all British citizens. History has to be made - and each age will make its own history.

A republican constitution would of course be a fundamental constitutional change. In many ways it would mean new things - not least a new relationship between people and government. But it would also be the culmination of a long tradition of British democratic republicanism, which began in the middle ages and continues to this day.

Ultimately this is not a debate about history and the past - it's a debate about what's right for Britain now, in the 21st century. We believe that the time has come for power to be held by the people.