PollBritish subjects, if the Parliament and the Queen emitted completely opposite orders, who would get more following?
      – BorgClown, 2010-01-04 at 04:51:55   (8 comments)

On 2010-01-04 at 04:52:47, BorgClown wrote...
What would happen if the civilians obeyed the Parliament, but the armed forces obeyed the Monarchy?
On 2010-01-04 at 17:28:39, Lee J Haywood wrote...
It doesn't really work like that. Originally the monarch had ultimate power, and parliament required guidance from the monarchy at all times. Eventually, parliament was forced to take charge and today the monarchy has no real power at all - members of the royal family merely make irritating and uninformed remarks about subjects upon which they have neither knowledge nor authority. It seems that my understanding of when the monarchy lost its power doesn't match what's on Wikipedia, and it's a complex enough subject that I cannot easily work out the details. Anyway, the best the queen could manage is to convince the population of a need for action but it wouldn't have any legal weight - it'd be little different to any mass protest that the government (parliament) would have to deal with.
On 2010-01-04 at 19:31:29, Melchior wrote...
Depends on what the orders were. Nobody is enough of a royalist to listen to the queen just because she's royal, and the same goes for parliament. The ideas would have to stand by their own merit. Technically I think the armed forces still have to swear loyalty to the queen, but if it came down to a conflict between the two I suspect she would be told to fuck off.
On 2010-01-05 at 04:46:15, BorgClown wrote...
Hey, the armed forces do take their vows more seriously than politicians, for example.
On 2010-01-05 at 23:06:41, Melchior wrote...
Still, it's a moral choice - they're there because they want to serve their country. If the queen decided to do something damaging, you can bet they would side with parliament. The reverse also applies.
On 2010-01-05 at 23:09:27, Melchior wrote...
Thinking about it, they would probably side with parliament unless it was a completely crazy order. Seeing as the government is responsible for the legal side of things, while the queen can pretty much do bugger all.
On 2010-01-06 at 00:05:20, Lee J Haywood wrote...
I was going to point out that the queen has a lot of fans in the older generation who have admired her from her early years, particularly given her role during World War II. People of my age and below aren't quite so enamoured with her and are merely respectful, so we're not that bothered about what she says - not that she ever makes any requests that I'm aware of (but then I've never watched any of her speeches).
On 2010-02-08 at 16:01:19, Thelevellers wrote...
Would definitely depend on the instruction - if I disagreed with both I'd go for Anarchy! :P You might be surprised to hear that I know of at least one young person (well, 26ish) that is really very supportive of the monarchy - confused the hell out of me at any rate... :S