Monarchy disgusts me.

My take is precisely the same as yours. Thank you for posting it.

I have one addition however: that addition is that the 'Royal Family' is obsolescent and, as a monarchy ought no longer to exist.

This 'family, not even of English or British heritage, gains its status and privilege on the basis of heredity. There is literally no rational, reasonable or acceptable criteria for that.

Monarchy and its supposed justification of a 'divine right to rule' is the ultimate example of inequity. It ought to have no place in modern society. Those who support it do so for motives as absurd as those that create fandom i.e. an almost insane worship and adoration for another person or group, usually on the basis of the fame attached to them.

That illogical elevation of status and level of adoration provided by fandom may stems largely from conditioning of those without to admire those 'with'. (Please excuse the poor syntax.) It's one mitigating factor is that, at least in the case of its application to elite sports people, musicians, actors and occasional examples in other fields, significant achievement or excellence in their field will form at least a substantial element in creating the admiration.

Although, there may be some members of Royal Families who have or do contribute to society by displaying some form of excellence or outstanding contribution, the reality is that even when it is true, that will rarely be the reason for their support and even where such is the case, usually will not acknowledge the almost certain privileged backing, influence and opportunities they have had that have accentuated their chances of success.

The perfidy, even outright criminality and horrendous behaviour of so many monarchs have displayed has shown that such, at some level, is likely to be a characteristic of these privileged people.

The reality is, however, that they are just human beings. They are no more worthy of exaltation than any other. They are a model of the highest levels of social inequity and privilege and rarely model any thought, behaviour or actions that are desirable in promoting an equitable and just society. Indeed, they are seen as above the law and even when breaking it the chances are they will receive no penalty, indeed unless by accident, the event is likely never to reach the knowledge of the people.

So, yes, it is time that people moved on from the one-sided, fame-seeking, gutter hugging, (non) journalists, personalities or commentators who persist in sensationalising the royal phenomenon, even to the point of persecution of some whilst offering absurd praise of others - and always without any serious, considered and accurate examination of evidence.

Not only that, however, it is long past time that we all moved on from the aburdity of divine right to rule and royal families and monarchy.

Constitutional monarchy such as exists in the UK is not, as many supporters seek to claim, a balance or moderation to elected government. In fact, because it cannot over-ride government, the reality is that, at best it is irrelevant to decision-making and when it is involved it is more likely to be detrimental. Just one appalling example being its involvement in the dismissal in 1975 of an elected Prime Minister of Australia who had the confidence of the parliament.

In 1953, what is still a well known brand of fly-spray was developed in order to protect Queen Elizabeth II from having to suffer the perils of the common bush fly whilst being carried in an open car to display her adeptness at the royal wave which, curiously, is not that different from the Australian wave used by ordinary Australians to deter those same flies. Yet she was cheered and adored by thousands of those who, in many cases, would not earn in a year what she spent in a day.

Better that we'd had an invention either aimed at benefitting those ordinary people first or defending them from monarchy, rather than flies.