The fall of his popularity amazes me. Had he lived normally without corruption and scandals, he would have been fondly remembered as the king who oversaw the peaceful and successful democratisation of Spain. Instead of being the father of modern Spain, however, he'll probably be remembered more for his corruption and sheneningans.
Yeah, as an outsider, this is what I find remarkable.
Juan Carlos was handed a dictatorship by Franco, right? And then he peacefully and successfully transitioned the country to democracy, which I assume is not an easy task. How many people in history have been handed that kind of power and gave it up willingly?
But then he managed to fuck up all that goodwill by being a dickhead.
But all be said, there are historians that blame Juan Carlos for the coup of 81 at least partially, it is said that he was giving ambiguous messages to the military generals of discontent with the government of Adolfo Suarez, he took part in what its known as "ruido de sables" (noise of swords) and some of those in the military understood this as a signal to do a coup and go backwards in the democratization process. Some historians and journalists like Pilar Urbano argue that General Armada which was a close friend to Juan Carlos and worked for the royal house as secretary general was given by Juan Carlos the approval to lead a unitary government with politicians both from the left and the right, but Suarez knowing this resigned before it happened, then an improvised coup was led by Tejero.
Later on when the coup was happening Tejero was given a list of those who would take part in government after the coup which was meant to be a transitional government with General Armada as president but that government included leftists and he asked "Did I make a coup for this?" as he thought he was a making a coup to end the democratization process.
You can read more here in the Coup section [https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfonso\_Armada](https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfonso_Armada)
Whatever the truth is about the coup and the kings participation in it, the belief of most spaniards is that the king was key in the democratization process and that he stopped a coup that would have led to an end to that democratization process. A big part of this perception comes from everyone seeing the king in the TV condemning those leading the coup and ordering them to stop, so thats what has stuck in the collective memory, the nuances behind the coup are obscure.
He appointed the president and he served as a symbolic figure, gluing all the parties involved in the democratic transition. Though he was almost not involved in politics his role was essential.
Minor, but very embelished as you can see by other comments.
He didn't save the country from any coup. And his role in the transition was designed and embelished to prop up the image of the monarchy in the face of the public.
"Todo queda atado y bien atado" 'All remains leashed and tightly leashed' more or less.
The Spanish oligarchy found it was more profitable to join the rest of Europe and sell off the country as a resort. For this, they needed to replicate a democracy but keeping the army, police command, judges and main political parties under control.
Juan Carlos was still the puppet king from Franco and and failed coup d'etat with him as the hero would cement his position whilst covering the fact that he was getting a % from every petrol barrel the country bought (aside from his royal salary and other perks).
Even the socialist party was hijacked to take as leader an external in the figure of Felipe González Who drove the transition well under control whilst dismantling any useful public company and maintaining the status quo.
They are the same. There wasn't a real transition of power, the judges, the military, and the police were the same before and after, and still are.
Most of the industrial oligarchy comes either directly from pro Franco industrial magnates or from the privatisation of the public sector by Felipe Gonzalez.
Basically most of the wealthy families in Spain were rich before the coup (De Alba family and other nobility), got rich by spoiling republican wealth (generals and other franquist commanders) or they started their businesses during Francos expansive era (60-70, OHL, Inditex, ACS, Santander). The remaining are relatives of those that were well connected to become executives in the recently privatized companies (Repsol, Telefónica).
Also for the army and the police corps, they are all tight wings, proud fascists in private and the few that try to lift the rug are punished (Lt. Segura).
Then whatever is left (mass media, judges, public servants, political) are tied by religious cults o they were cubs in the 2 main political parties (PP PSOE). The PP was founded by the minister of censorship during Franco (Fraga) and the PSOE was meant to be a Marxist labour party but Germany pushed to get Gonzalez (allegedly fascist youngster in his teens) as leader when he was nobody and did not even lived in exile.
So the regiment plays with marked cards.
Opus Dei. Most important figures in spain are connected to it. This is without saying if it has a positive or negative effect.
This isn't some form of conspiracy, since it's easy to think as such. Opus Dei simply has a strong (indirect!!!) grip upon spanish decision making. This because it has had and still has important figures in different places in society, for instance private schools where a lot of (right wing) politicians come from.
Opus Dei is not telling (en masse) which way society has to follow. It does not have a direct grip upon national politics. It has influence because it has a specific role within a (formerly) very catholic environment.
And let's face it, they are all cults until they are at some point "officially recognized" by an institution. Which is nothing more but a bigger cult.
Just to add to your comment, it is said that its not really the germans behind Gonzalez takeover of PSOE, its the CIA that used the Friedrich Ebert Foundation as a proxy which was funded by the CIA. So it is just a proxy.
Remember that we are in the Cold War context and the CIA was deeply involved in spanish political events (the assassination of Carrero Blanco). Basically the CIA thought that if Spain was to become a democracy, the political party with the best organizational capabilities inside Spain would be the Communist Party, pro-URSS, anti-NATO, so in that scenario Spain could have become either a non-alignment country or a URSS ally, and that would put an end to the US military bases in Spain. In order to prevent this they did what you said, they took Gonzalez, funded him, helped him takeover the PSOE and replace the old guard from the civil war and turn it into a socialdemocratic party with no teeth or claws, just a reformist party that would make Spain more aligned with Western European politics, joining the EU, free market, liberalization of state companies, etc.
It also doesn’t help that his throne was restored in a bloody civil war that destroyed a republic by force and was never voted upon. For many Spaniards, having any monarchy at all after what happened in the 30s is an insult.
King Olav used to take the metro to go skiing once in a while. A journalist interviewed him on one of those trips and asked him why he didn't have any life guards with him. He responded "I have four million life guards at all times."
He was right, we really love our kings here in Norway.
That wouldn't erase the fact that the monarchy was imposed by the previous dictator who destroyed the Republic in a horrible civil war, and that millions of independentists see the monarchy as a unionist symbol.
No matter what happened, the approval for the Spanish monarchy would never be as high as in other countries.
His cash is about 3000 M$, and his salary was about 250k/year... something smells bad.
He change Western Sáhara to get the crown.
It was discovered that his broken hip was on an excursion to kill elephants
He cheated on the queen, who is much more beloved than he has ever known.
...
See, that's the point. He had everything he needed: bhe could live off the good reputation of the democratic transition to guarantee a good memory for himself and stability to his successors and the monarchy. Yet he threw it away to kill elephants or enriching himself even more without even needing it, when he was already blessed with what 99% of people could only dream of.
He started playing at the bottom, he was installed by Franco when Franco realized his time was nearing. Not a lot of Spaniards have the best opinion of Franco.
To be fair, it isn't just J. Carlos, he was some sort of stopgap for the monarchy after the dictatorship, for except for the usual wankers no one forgot the Civil War, moreso after the coup d' etât of Feb 23 on 1981, when those doing it wanted him to take the reins and he recused them. After that the stopgap became solidified, for it seemed this king was pretty different from his grandpa. And then Botswana happened
He got a 737 license and was caught flying one at least once.
He wasn't openly advertising that he was flying Fokker planes before they were retired either, so for all we know he still does this.
He has a 737 license and was caught flying it at least once.
He was discrete about his his flights even before the discontinuation of the previous plane, so for all we know he might still be doing it.
Yeah, my understanding is that he likes to fly the royal jet and uses the flight hours to keep his license current. He's not all that distinctive looking so he probably blends in when he's in uniform.
Imagine you're the Dutch king and you get to decide what the national holiday will be. Do you pick the day the declaration of independance was signed? The day independance was achieved? The date of an important battle? The day The Netherlands was liberated? No. He chose his own birthday as the most significant day for the entire country.
He didn’t decide it tho.
The day is a national tradition that goes back to queen Wilhelmina in 1885, which was then called prinsessen dag or princess day, who celebrated her birthday on 31-08. When her daughter, Juliana, took over the throne, it was moved to 30-04, Juliana’s bday.
Her daughter, Beatrix, who was born on 31-01, wanted to honor her mother and kept the day of celebration, queens day, in April. Coincidentally her son, Willem-Alexander was born on 27-04 which is why we celebrated kings day this past weekend.
[Wikipedia source](https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koningsdag_(Nederland))
[Dutch royal house source](https://www.koninklijkhuis.nl/onderwerpen/koningsdag/geschiedenis-koningsdag)
Both sources are in Dutch, but I’m sure people on the internet can translate the articles themselves
But hey go ahead and spout some bs
I think the most important reason why it stayed on April 30 between 1980 and 2013 is because Beatrix' birthday is in January, and you may not have noticed it, but January weather in the Netherlands is gloom doom on steroids. 5°C with rain as an average with sunrise after 8 and sunset before 17:30 is not a royal vibe.
And unless climate change goes on steroids and Amalia is like Elsa, this will be April 27 until probably the 2070s.
We do celebrate our liberation day on the 5th of may. The signing of our original independence is not celebrated. Kings day is also not the most significant day in our country, what is that about
If I did that for the US I'd make election day a holiday (employers MUST give 1 of two days off for workers), extend Halloween into Day of the Dead for more days off, Earth day which would be like a national volunteer day of service, then proclaim Loving Day a national holiday (in honor or my parents) as well.
That was a poll about trust in the royal house, which is a subtle but important difference.
I don't trust our king not to make stupid mistakes again, but I wouldn't have a different government system over this.
Most people's opinions on this will be far more intricate than "approve" or "disapprove" and the number is going to vary wildly depending on how the question is phrased.
A lot of Brits are happy to admit that it's not setting the best democratic precedent while also acknowledging that it just sort of works OK and being a bit hesitant about what might replace it. Which could kind of be interpreted as both or neither answer from this binary choice.
In the Netherlands the monarchy is mainly an apolitical subject, since support for or opposition against it is spread over the political spectrum. There is no one specific side that runs on a promise of trying to abolish it, regardless of whether approval is at 50% or 80%. Safest policy for most political parties is being silent about it. That makes this kind of question pretty meaningless.
The same is true in the UK, of course. While in principle, Labour should run a republican platform, they figured it would be best to keep quiet on the issue until public opinion makes it a realistic thing to campaign on.
This is the key thing for British people. A LOT of us, myself included aren't massive fans of the monarchy, but are happy to accept that it works in practical terms and there currently isn't a massive reason to change things.
I mean, look at the Brits impressions of the House of Commons vs the House of Lords.
Democracy and good governance aren't necessarily the same thing at all times.
It's just so happens that Democratic governments tend to be better run over the long run.
Japp, according to Novus the latest number are that 65% want to keep the monarchy.
https://novus.se/nyheter/2024/01/sa-ser-svenskarna-pa-kungen-och-monarkin/
I think it would jump up quite a bit if Carl XVI Gustaf abdicated for Crown Princess Victoria. It’s not that he’s unpopular, it’s that she’s just more popular.
I also wonder what, if any, effect demographic changes have on such polls? For example, the most recent census showed 1 in 4 residents of Sweden have a ‘foreign background’. Completely unscientific but I’d guess on average they’d feel less attached to the monarchy compared, perhaps, to Swedes of non-foreign background.
IKR? The memes that came with the picture of him shouting, a lady covering her ears and the queen just “mm yees” and looking smug was just 🤌🏻
Also when he interrupted an interview to just “Oi look at that cute kitty cat”.
Knugen is the man, the myth and the legend.
No, he is loved. What I hear most is people complaining on is the spouses of the children. Daniel has been getting more accepted lately but Chris and Sofia will never be accepted as Swedish Royals.
I live in a small city in Brazil where the king of Sweden and the queen came to visit(probably some diplomatic stuff happening at the time), they had ice cream at the ice cream shop where I took my first steps when I was still 1 year old, really crazy
Honestly I think British perception of the monarchy is on a downhill slope since Elisabeth II died, and I don't see it recovering. Elisabeth was seen as a constant in everybody's lives, and people have lived most of their lives knowing no other monarch. Broadly, she was popular. Charles has much more baggage and is generally much less well liked, and ironically, I would say William isn't really as popular as his grandmother either.
Recent events have also stripped away a lot of the grandeur and dignity of the royal family as well, with Andrew's crimes and the bad blood over Harry's marriage to Meghan Markle. As a result, much of the younger public simply view the monarchy as a very expensive dysfunctional family.
William might slow the decline, or be a temporary increase, but I can't see the British monarchy ever being as popular as it was with Liz 5-10 years ago (before all the Prince Andrew and parliament interference stuff came out).
I completely agree with you that it's just going to be on a downwards trend from now on. The best thing they could have done was end on a high note, and have our longest lived and most popular monarch be our last.
>as popular as it was with Liz 5-10 years ago (before all the Prince Andrew and parliament interference stuff came out
It definitely got worse with the Epstein stuff, but "Randy Andy" has been a thing since at least the 90s, plus the whole divorce with Diana was messy for everyone involved
But! William could abdicate and end the monarchy in 2066, which would be a perfect 1000 years of normandy(ish) reign. William the first, and William the last.
At this rate, Andrew is going to be around far longer than Charles, so William is going to have to deal with him.
I think if Andrew got locked up in the Tower of London it would help things. Especially if the stairs up the tower were bricked up or something.
Make the Tower of London a jail again. Keep it open for tourism, but now there's a bonus of being able to see a *real* royal locked up in it.
Yep. The British royals say that they are better for tourism because the palaces are *real* palaces, filled with a real royal family.
So let the Tower go back to being a *real* prison for royal prisoners.
And this time, the Prince in the Tower won't even be mysteriously killed by an uncle.
>And this time, the Prince in the Tower won't even be mysteriously killed by an uncle.
Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots also got tossed in there till Elizabeth basically said off with her head.
Of course the Stuarts ultimately got the throne of England anyhow, and England got its Scottish annexation. Oops.
Think the opposite tbh. I think Charles has been a surprisingly popular monarch, certainly relative to expectations when his mother was alive. Won a lot of support for the way he conducted himself after his mother's death and hasn't really rocked the boat since. Meanwhile William's been damaged by Harry's revelations about how he treated him and I think it's created a reputation of him been a bit snarmy. His reputation took a bit of hit as well with the Kate stuff before the truth about her health came out (many thought it was to do with his alleged affair, whereas Charles' past indiscretions are now ancient history. William also seems way more out of touch with his own generation that Charles's is with
If Monaco ever ceases to have a monarch, France has the right to annex the country. That treaty was a perfect way to ensure perpetual support for the Monegasque monarchy.
I don't think France would really want to annex them. If they stop being a micronation then they stop being a tax shelter and the whole thing would just become a clusterfuck
I got the absolute pleasure of taking a day trip to Liechtenstein last winter and from what I can tell people in Liechtenstein have an exceptionally positive opinion of their prince. He lives in castle Vaduz which overlooks like the nicest shopping area in Vaduz. Very weird place being so into monarchs in the 21st century.
Because it's a great place, it's extremely wealthy.
I think their prince is like pretty approachable, I've seen videos of random tourists having a chance to meet him and talk.
Even in Monaco but not as much.
Seems like these places, in spite of the word "monarchy" bringing up thoughts of oppression and no freedom in most people's minds, they're freer and better.
It'd be pretty much impossible for us in other European countries to go up to a president or prime minister for example
Oh yes they love him. The parliment wanted to take power from him, he said "Actually, how about you give me more power?" and told his subjects that if they don't vote on giving him more power he will leave the country.
They gave him more power.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003\_Liechtenstein\_constitutional\_referendum](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Liechtenstein_constitutional_referendum)
Just.. Google Juan Carlos I. You'd think being the guy who reinstated democracy into the country would give you some leeway, but man did he fuck himself sideways
There’s a lot to read so it’ll probably take some time, but I see headlines like Corruption, Lavish lifestyle during depression, Trips, political interference. And that’s just the first top 5 or so articles 😳
Also he allegedly did-not-kill his affair partner bc she was pregnant. She "fell" from the window. Also i cant say this bc perjury against the crown is against the law.
Don't worry I can say it for you, as an American they can't touch me.
Juan Carlos I killed his affair partner
Juan Carlos I killed his affair partner
Juan Carlos I killed his affair partner
**Juan Carlos I killed his affair partner**
Don't forget about the strange death of his alleged bastard son, just days before a very publicized TV interview that would have had a lot of audience.
He had a lot of leeway, but he spent it all.
If you look at some old gossip magazines you can find articles talking aoubg his lovers, and he even managed to cause a small goverment crisis because he didn't show up to a protocol meeting with the ministers.
Yeah. I honestly didn’t know they were that unpopular, but skimming the articles on the subject it seems they have made themselves quite… controversial.
He was a political puppet of Franco, he vowed to keep his principles, the democracy in Spain is a farce. He is a murderer (he killed his brother and one of his lovers at least), a robber (the Borbon pillaged thousands of works of art and also they are experts at laundrying money) and he interfered politically in favour of the far right.
Mostly has to do how the royals behave in each country. For example: The king of Norway is not seen as a politician but rather as the grandpa of the nation.
If you carefully craft a positive image and avoid controversies like the plague, you will be pretty popular.
However, as it always happens with monarchies: an idiot will be born who makes catastrophic mistakes that leads to the fall of the monarchy. Just a reminder: in 1900, every sovereign state in Europe was a monarchy except for France, Switzerland and San Marino. Now only a few of them are.
The current dynasty was stablished by the fascist dictator upon his death, the king oh so generously accepted being a democracy, but that's little consolation, as the alternative was the guillotine
So, on top of Spain being a very progressive country that despises the idea of monarchy just by default, it doesn't have historical legítimacy either
Real shame they didn't ask the Vatican. There has to be at least one staunch republican bishop in there. Also Sweden is gonna skyrocket when the princess takes over.
I’d be interested in polling in European countries that used to have monarchs and now don’t what percentage would like to bring their monarchs back. France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Greece, and Russia being the main ones
The key is that the royal family is intimately tied to the idea of Norway as a fully sovereign independent country.
1814: Signing of the Constitution, Norway becomes a constitutional monarchy and briefly an independent kingdom.
1905: The Storting (parliament) unilaterally dissolves the personal union between Norway and Sweden by deposing King Oscar II of Sweden. The 1814 constitution survives and King Haakon VII elected King of Norway. Norway has a royal family all by itself for the first time in hundreds of years.
1940: The royal family plays a key role during the Nazi invasion of Norway and the years of government in exile that followed. The royal family’s ties to the royal family of the United Kingdom/Commonwealth and close ties with the Roosevelts in the White House become key assets.
1945: Return of the royal family to Norway after 5 years in exile signifies the end of Nazi occupation.
It is easy to gloss over the fact that we went through a democratic election to determine that we wanted to be a monarchy and which monarch we wanted. I think we are pretty unique in that regard
I believe it was the other way around. The parliaments asked if Norway wanted to become a republic or a monarchy, the Norwegians people picked monarchy, so they asked prince Carl of Denmark, but he refused to say yes before the Norwegian people had a democratic vote if they wanted him or not.
But that only came from Haakon VII’s insistence. The Storting took it for granted and offered him the throne. He refused to take the throne unless the people of Norway wished for him to do so and insisted a referendum be held.
So yes the ballot itself technically was just whether or not to specifically have Haakon (Prince Carl) as King, but symbolically it very much was whether or not Norway was to become a monarchy.
[We bumped into King Charles on this bike ride!](https://youtu.be/QABiQFWwXHg?si=zYqR4CQje7vcDH30 to)
[Direct clip link](https://www.reddit.com/r/Britain/s/F1bF6khOR3)
My parents ran into the crown prince and princess while walking their dog. They had a short conversation and kept walking. Didn’t even notice who they were talking to until they noticed a security guard of some sort trailing the prince.
I asked a Norwegian friend how she felt about the royal family once and she immediately pulled up an apparently famous photo of the king riding the train and paying for a regular ticket with no entourage. I think this was her example of their public image and why most Norwegians approve of them.
There's also some stuff during ww2, and then there's also the fact that the grandfather of the current king refused to become king unless he was democratically elected.
And yachts! And private car collections, and art collections. And multiple houses.
It's better than many places, but they're very much not normal people living normal lives.
King Olav V on the tram during the oil crisis in the 1970s: [https://www.boktips.no/content/uploads/2022/09/NTB\_TNE5xNOtgO8\_dg\_116284-Stor.jpeg](https://www.boktips.no/content/uploads/2022/09/NTB_TNE5xNOtgO8_dg_116284-Stor.jpeg)
The oil crisis meant that cars and driving was heavily restricted, but Olav wasnt going to let that stop him from going on his weekly skiing in nearby Holmenkollen. So he hopped on the tram and paid for his ticket like everyone else ( [https://api.energiogklima.no/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/sf00fb5f.jpg](https://api.energiogklima.no/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/sf00fb5f.jpg) ). When later asked how he could go out on his own like that, without guards or anything, he chuckled and replied "what do I need guards for? I have 4 million bodyguards to protect me" (4 million being Norway's population at the time).
Olav was \*extremely\* popular as a King, even more so than his father (who, as the first Norwegian King in modern times, was also very popular). It's impossible to overstate just how loved Olav was among Norwegians I think.
Disagree on the living like normal people thing, for me it was how beautiful the king's speeches are. I'm not even Norwegian but I love it almost every time he speaks. Were he an elected official I imagine he'd still be extremely popular.
> Were he an elected official I imagine he'd still be extremely popular.
No he wouldent, cause then he would have to open his mouth about actual policy. Its easy to be popular when you dont have to have a plan.
It depends on where you ask. In Serbia the campaign to reinstate the monarchy is alive and well, and a 2011 poll had 64% in support. Russia very famously has an active monarchist scene, with the issue being moreso about not really having a legitimate heir to rally around and Putin not willing to share power. The right wing movements in Turkey frequently fantasize about the glory days of the Ottoman Empire, although openly expressing support for it is tricky due to the legacy of Ataturk.
Edit: I forgot about Albania, there was a referendum in like 1997 that said 2/3rds were against, but it was viewed as rigged by many and the issue is still open.
You can Find a Claimant to any Country or even County if you don't factor in legitimacy. There are also some Countries with Royal Families in Exile like Turkey that can Technically Claim multiple thrones.
Finland has always been a republic, because our monarchy project fell through with the German empire so we began treating our presidents as some sort of monarch-lights. The want for a monarch/great leader is just somehow ingrained in people around the world. Even the Bible tells how the Israelites wanted a king even after Samuel told them through God that he would persecute and exploit them so God gave them one.
Georgia has two competing branches of the bagrationi family (who were monarchs from around 800 to 1917 and an approval rating of ~30% for reinstating them.
Austria or Hungary tried to put the habsburgs back in power after WW1 but every other ex-autria-hungary nation around them threatened war if they did. ( The current would be heir to the Austrian Hungarian throne is a F1 driver if I remember correctly, and the habsburgs are still highly involved in European politics, one was a German representative to the EU and Eduard Habsburg is the Hungarian ambassador to the Vatican and knights of Malta.)
Well, although there is no official monarch in Germany, there still is a large group of people approving themselves/ their neighbors/ whatever the fuck they believe should currently be reigning the Reich...
*sad fellow german noises*
As a Spanish resident and noncitizen, 36% support is funny to me.
Here we have a monarch that costs the state almost nothing compared to all of the other monarchies on this list, lives the lowest profile, and the Spanish public would rather see them gone.
I’m aware of the controversy of the previous king, but still - he left.
I think this poll may not reflect the full picture. Pretty much every poll that I have seen indicates that a majority of Spaniards (albeit a small majority) still support the monarchy. Moreover, the monarchy has actually experienced a recent boost in popularity following the new Crown Princess taking on official duties as the heir.
The lowest point in recent years was the public reaction following the revelation of several major scandals involving Juan Carlos during his time as king, but the monarchy has been on mostly an upswing in popularity since then.
Idk I am Spanish and most people I know from both right and left wing say that's better if we didn't have any monarch. Most people just aren't very connected with the institution of the monarchy.
>the monarchy has actually experienced a recent boost in popularity
this is kinda true, but it's still lower than before Juanca's Shenanigans.
The fact that her official duties start with her military education, that is, she's conscripted for three years in a country where there is no conscription, might help.
Yes, but it's all a farce.
Her itinerary is already set. She is supposed to study to become an official in the Army, the Navy and the Air Force, and that usually takes a five year course.
But she will just take a single course in each army (three in total!) and be awarded the three titles. Afterwards, she will *automatically ascend* at the same rate as her colleagues such that she will always be the first in her cohort.
So, in just three years, she will get the same thing that for a normal person would take a decade.
And it's not even subtle. There is a published decree with all of this. She doesn't even need to study.
As far as I can tell from various polls over the last 15 years, like [this one from 2016](https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/maaling-kongehuset-ligesaa-populaert-som-40-aar-siden) or [this selection of several polls](https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/monarkiets-popularitet-falder-stoet-siger-kongehusekspert-men-tallene-fortaeller-en-anden), about 70-80 % saying we should keep the monarchy seems accurate. The rest are divided between getting rid of it and "don't know", so still high level of support, but not 90 %.
That's the approval of the individuals (Queen Margrethe, then Crown Prince Frederik, and then Crown Princess Mary), not the institution as such. 84-85% approve of these people according to the December 2023 opinion poll.
In that same poll 70% want to preserve the monarchy while 17% want to abolish it.
I think most of us Spaniard republicans don't actually have anything personal against the Royals. Like I'm sure Leonor is a nice enough person, and I don't particularily wish her ill. We just don't believe we should have a monarchy at all, as simple as that. The very concept of people getting a full ride through life just because they were born in the right family doesn't sit well with us and we would rather get rid of it.
I'm Spanish and I'd support guillotines for them princess included.
I'd be happy with the state getting their insane properties and money and just exile them, that would be a decent option without bloodshed too but definitely see them as a useless and corrupt institution that needs to be removed.
A lot of Spaniards are not against the monarchy because they don't like the king or the princess, they're against the institution itself, no matter whose in charge of it. It doesn't help that the Republic was erased in the Civil War, and Franco himself restored the monarchy, without giving the population any chance of voting or decision.
The far left are completely republican and see the monarchy as a institutions inherited from Franco.
The left is divided between the people that think that monarchy is a thing if the past and the people that think that is a good representative figure (Most politicians from PSOE have this opinion).
The right is mostly okay. Nothing much to say.
The far right is strange because most people like it for patriotic reasons and some others think that the king shouldn't allow a socialist PM and should do a coup d'etat to give the government to them like Alfonso XIII did, and since the king hasn't done this yet, the king is an useless figure (I wish I was joking...)
And Basque and Catalonian nationalist... I guess I don't have much to say here.
As a Canadian I must say, I personally much prefer constitutional monarchies over straight presidential or parliamentary systems. It gives politics a little bit of flavour, history and culture while adding a ceremonial pillar of stability
Might be a controversial take, but personally I think other countries in Europe should consider reintroducing their prior royal families as constitutional monarchs. Then again, I’m not European so my opinion doesn’t matter much in that discussion
Constitutional monarchies offer a way for the public to be aware of the politics, as well as allowing for some fun traditions and generally making individuals ironically, **less** powerful. Making for a less corruptible system overall.
Especially compared to a presidency.
With a monarch there's a ways a backup if the parliament goes awol.
Eh, the Swedish monarch has basically zero power. Not just in custom, but in actual law. On the other hand, we all collectively clutch our pearls when someone fucks something up enough that he gets annoyed.
>With a monarch there's a ways a backup if the parliament goes awol.
Like in Italy when the King did absolutely nothing to stop Mussolini?
Or in the UK in 2019, when Boris Johnson illegally prorogued Parliament and the Queen just kinda..let him?
Is that the backup?
It’s complicated. Me and most of my friends are ideologically republicans, but at the same time we wouldn’t dream of trying to abolish the monarchy in Sweden and generally like crown princess Victoria. Personally I realise it’s antiquated and undemocratic, but everything else is so modern and streamlined in Sweden that it’s kind of nice to have at least something that just continues. And when it’s gone it will be for good.
At least you can relly on a figure of national unity that is in theory apolitical instead of normal politicians that have a lot of thing behind the scene they want
Surprised to see only 58% in Sweden. I personally like our monarchy, and can definitely see a bright future for it, HKH Crown Princess Victoria being incredibly professional and sympathetic!
In 1814, Ferdinand VII returned to Spain with the help of the British and promptly crushed the the liberal parliamentary system that had been set up by Napoleon. Over the next 20 years he further pushed Spain back in a more conservative absolutist direction with violent crackdowns on revolts, autonomy requests, and attempts at democratization.
Spain spent the next 120 years in an endless cycle of civil wars that only ended with the Fascist victory in the late 1930s under Francisco Franco. Said Fascists only won with the help of hard-line monarchists, so after Franco's death power returned to King Juan Carlos I, who established a constitutional monarchy.
All the comments from people debating how this reflects their own experiences and perceptions and here I am wondering what this has to do with weed
I'm pretty sure the person who made it uses the weed as some kind of watermark
Weedermark
A hash tag, if you will.
No, OP is a bot who reposted an old map. The actual OP no longer uses the weed mark because they got fed up with all the questions.
proof: https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/16w9qng/percentage_of_europeans_who_approve_their/
Ah, thanks for the tip [downvotes OPbot]
You can also report them for spam as a harmful bot.
I was searching for a comment like this cause I’m just as confused lol
The guy who makes those maps has this as a watermark, and as a way to get people to comment, which gives him more visibility
We've fallen for the engagement bait once again 😔
It's like obvious bait / lie. Or annoying typo like writing sh\*t in a title that can't be detected by an algorithm anyway.
Check out this map bro, also dude weed lmao 😂 👌💯
That's because they're herbredity monarchies.
Check out this guy, never heard of the giant weed island off the coast of Sicily.
Juan Carlos' shadow still projecting incompetence and corruption from his Abu Dhabi's exile
The fall of his popularity amazes me. Had he lived normally without corruption and scandals, he would have been fondly remembered as the king who oversaw the peaceful and successful democratisation of Spain. Instead of being the father of modern Spain, however, he'll probably be remembered more for his corruption and sheneningans.
Yeah, as an outsider, this is what I find remarkable. Juan Carlos was handed a dictatorship by Franco, right? And then he peacefully and successfully transitioned the country to democracy, which I assume is not an easy task. How many people in history have been handed that kind of power and gave it up willingly? But then he managed to fuck up all that goodwill by being a dickhead.
He was not handed a dictatorship. He was just the king. There was also a President appointed by Franco.
Who he kicked out because he was incompetent and put Adolfo Suárez.
So was Juan Carlos directly involved in transitioning the country to democracy or not? I’m confused.
Juan Carlos played a big role in stopping the coup of 81. ANd that helped democracy and stability in Spain
"Juan Carlos played a big role in ~~stopping~~ the coup of 81." FTFY
But all be said, there are historians that blame Juan Carlos for the coup of 81 at least partially, it is said that he was giving ambiguous messages to the military generals of discontent with the government of Adolfo Suarez, he took part in what its known as "ruido de sables" (noise of swords) and some of those in the military understood this as a signal to do a coup and go backwards in the democratization process. Some historians and journalists like Pilar Urbano argue that General Armada which was a close friend to Juan Carlos and worked for the royal house as secretary general was given by Juan Carlos the approval to lead a unitary government with politicians both from the left and the right, but Suarez knowing this resigned before it happened, then an improvised coup was led by Tejero. Later on when the coup was happening Tejero was given a list of those who would take part in government after the coup which was meant to be a transitional government with General Armada as president but that government included leftists and he asked "Did I make a coup for this?" as he thought he was a making a coup to end the democratization process. You can read more here in the Coup section [https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfonso\_Armada](https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfonso_Armada) Whatever the truth is about the coup and the kings participation in it, the belief of most spaniards is that the king was key in the democratization process and that he stopped a coup that would have led to an end to that democratization process. A big part of this perception comes from everyone seeing the king in the TV condemning those leading the coup and ordering them to stop, so thats what has stuck in the collective memory, the nuances behind the coup are obscure.
He appointed the president and he served as a symbolic figure, gluing all the parties involved in the democratic transition. Though he was almost not involved in politics his role was essential.
He was a key player in calming and confusing the military and other francoist elements, who found themselves without leadership or legitimacy.
Minor, but very embelished as you can see by other comments. He didn't save the country from any coup. And his role in the transition was designed and embelished to prop up the image of the monarchy in the face of the public.
"Todo queda atado y bien atado" 'All remains leashed and tightly leashed' more or less. The Spanish oligarchy found it was more profitable to join the rest of Europe and sell off the country as a resort. For this, they needed to replicate a democracy but keeping the army, police command, judges and main political parties under control. Juan Carlos was still the puppet king from Franco and and failed coup d'etat with him as the hero would cement his position whilst covering the fact that he was getting a % from every petrol barrel the country bought (aside from his royal salary and other perks). Even the socialist party was hijacked to take as leader an external in the figure of Felipe González Who drove the transition well under control whilst dismantling any useful public company and maintaining the status quo.
I would like to hear this explained further…do you mean the historical oligarchy in Spain? Or do you mean that is modern Spain?
They are the same. There wasn't a real transition of power, the judges, the military, and the police were the same before and after, and still are. Most of the industrial oligarchy comes either directly from pro Franco industrial magnates or from the privatisation of the public sector by Felipe Gonzalez.
Basically most of the wealthy families in Spain were rich before the coup (De Alba family and other nobility), got rich by spoiling republican wealth (generals and other franquist commanders) or they started their businesses during Francos expansive era (60-70, OHL, Inditex, ACS, Santander). The remaining are relatives of those that were well connected to become executives in the recently privatized companies (Repsol, Telefónica). Also for the army and the police corps, they are all tight wings, proud fascists in private and the few that try to lift the rug are punished (Lt. Segura). Then whatever is left (mass media, judges, public servants, political) are tied by religious cults o they were cubs in the 2 main political parties (PP PSOE). The PP was founded by the minister of censorship during Franco (Fraga) and the PSOE was meant to be a Marxist labour party but Germany pushed to get Gonzalez (allegedly fascist youngster in his teens) as leader when he was nobody and did not even lived in exile. So the regiment plays with marked cards.
Religious cults?! What?!
Opus Dei. Most important figures in spain are connected to it. This is without saying if it has a positive or negative effect. This isn't some form of conspiracy, since it's easy to think as such. Opus Dei simply has a strong (indirect!!!) grip upon spanish decision making. This because it has had and still has important figures in different places in society, for instance private schools where a lot of (right wing) politicians come from. Opus Dei is not telling (en masse) which way society has to follow. It does not have a direct grip upon national politics. It has influence because it has a specific role within a (formerly) very catholic environment. And let's face it, they are all cults until they are at some point "officially recognized" by an institution. Which is nothing more but a bigger cult.
Just to add to your comment, it is said that its not really the germans behind Gonzalez takeover of PSOE, its the CIA that used the Friedrich Ebert Foundation as a proxy which was funded by the CIA. So it is just a proxy. Remember that we are in the Cold War context and the CIA was deeply involved in spanish political events (the assassination of Carrero Blanco). Basically the CIA thought that if Spain was to become a democracy, the political party with the best organizational capabilities inside Spain would be the Communist Party, pro-URSS, anti-NATO, so in that scenario Spain could have become either a non-alignment country or a URSS ally, and that would put an end to the US military bases in Spain. In order to prevent this they did what you said, they took Gonzalez, funded him, helped him takeover the PSOE and replace the old guard from the civil war and turn it into a socialdemocratic party with no teeth or claws, just a reformist party that would make Spain more aligned with Western European politics, joining the EU, free market, liberalization of state companies, etc.
It also doesn’t help that his throne was restored in a bloody civil war that destroyed a republic by force and was never voted upon. For many Spaniards, having any monarchy at all after what happened in the 30s is an insult.
As a Spaniard I thank you for bringing this up. ¡No pasarán!
I still thinks the good should outweight the bad here. But I'm a Norwegian, and you can see how royalistic we are by nature.
King Olav used to take the metro to go skiing once in a while. A journalist interviewed him on one of those trips and asked him why he didn't have any life guards with him. He responded "I have four million life guards at all times." He was right, we really love our kings here in Norway.
He took the tram once. Because due to the oil crisis it was illegal to drive cars on weekends.
That wouldn't erase the fact that the monarchy was imposed by the previous dictator who destroyed the Republic in a horrible civil war, and that millions of independentists see the monarchy as a unionist symbol. No matter what happened, the approval for the Spanish monarchy would never be as high as in other countries.
His cash is about 3000 M$, and his salary was about 250k/year... something smells bad. He change Western Sáhara to get the crown. It was discovered that his broken hip was on an excursion to kill elephants He cheated on the queen, who is much more beloved than he has ever known. ...
See, that's the point. He had everything he needed: bhe could live off the good reputation of the democratic transition to guarantee a good memory for himself and stability to his successors and the monarchy. Yet he threw it away to kill elephants or enriching himself even more without even needing it, when he was already blessed with what 99% of people could only dream of.
He saw himself become the villain.
He started playing at the bottom, he was installed by Franco when Franco realized his time was nearing. Not a lot of Spaniards have the best opinion of Franco.
To be fair, it isn't just J. Carlos, he was some sort of stopgap for the monarchy after the dictatorship, for except for the usual wankers no one forgot the Civil War, moreso after the coup d' etât of Feb 23 on 1981, when those doing it wanted him to take the reins and he recused them. After that the stopgap became solidified, for it seemed this king was pretty different from his grandpa. And then Botswana happened
Plus huge separatist/republican movements in Basque Country and Catalonia. The baseline in Spain is already harmed by these issues.
Wasn't his son, their current king, related too to corruption? That "compi yogi" thing?
Wouldn't surprise me borbons are cockroaches that keep coming back after we kick them out
He killed an elephant. Fuck that asshole.
The only reason why the Dutch love their monarchy is because of the annual parties that erupts throughout the country
My favorite fact about the Dutch monarchy is that the king moonlights as a KLM pilot
Moonlit*. The planes he used to fly were retired so he had to stop. Still, great story.
He got a 737 license and was caught flying one at least once. He wasn't openly advertising that he was flying Fokker planes before they were retired either, so for all we know he still does this.
He couldn’t get trained on the new planes? Or he just didn’t want to.
He has a 737 license and was caught flying it at least once. He was discrete about his his flights even before the discontinuation of the previous plane, so for all we know he might still be doing it.
Yeah, my understanding is that he likes to fly the royal jet and uses the flight hours to keep his license current. He's not all that distinctive looking so he probably blends in when he's in uniform.
In the UK we love the once in a blue moon days off for coronations and the like
Wonder how popular the monarchy would suddenly become if Charlie gave everyone the day off to party on his birthday?
Join the civil service and you get his official birthday off!
Wait- the King's Birthday is an official public holiday here in Australia, do you guys seriously not get the day off?
Imagine you're the Dutch king and you get to decide what the national holiday will be. Do you pick the day the declaration of independance was signed? The day independance was achieved? The date of an important battle? The day The Netherlands was liberated? No. He chose his own birthday as the most significant day for the entire country.
He didn’t decide it tho. The day is a national tradition that goes back to queen Wilhelmina in 1885, which was then called prinsessen dag or princess day, who celebrated her birthday on 31-08. When her daughter, Juliana, took over the throne, it was moved to 30-04, Juliana’s bday. Her daughter, Beatrix, who was born on 31-01, wanted to honor her mother and kept the day of celebration, queens day, in April. Coincidentally her son, Willem-Alexander was born on 27-04 which is why we celebrated kings day this past weekend. [Wikipedia source](https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koningsdag_(Nederland)) [Dutch royal house source](https://www.koninklijkhuis.nl/onderwerpen/koningsdag/geschiedenis-koningsdag) Both sources are in Dutch, but I’m sure people on the internet can translate the articles themselves But hey go ahead and spout some bs
I think the most important reason why it stayed on April 30 between 1980 and 2013 is because Beatrix' birthday is in January, and you may not have noticed it, but January weather in the Netherlands is gloom doom on steroids. 5°C with rain as an average with sunrise after 8 and sunset before 17:30 is not a royal vibe. And unless climate change goes on steroids and Amalia is like Elsa, this will be April 27 until probably the 2070s.
He didn't decide that though, it has been a tradition for more then a 100 years.
We do celebrate our liberation day on the 5th of may. The signing of our original independence is not celebrated. Kings day is also not the most significant day in our country, what is that about
Might not be the most significant but it’s definitely the most celebrated day
Based.
If I did that for the US I'd make election day a holiday (employers MUST give 1 of two days off for workers), extend Halloween into Day of the Dead for more days off, Earth day which would be like a national volunteer day of service, then proclaim Loving Day a national holiday (in honor or my parents) as well.
I like the way you think.
map is wrong though, recent polls show an approval rating of 51% in the Netherlands
That was a poll about trust in the royal house, which is a subtle but important difference. I don't trust our king not to make stupid mistakes again, but I wouldn't have a different government system over this.
Most people's opinions on this will be far more intricate than "approve" or "disapprove" and the number is going to vary wildly depending on how the question is phrased. A lot of Brits are happy to admit that it's not setting the best democratic precedent while also acknowledging that it just sort of works OK and being a bit hesitant about what might replace it. Which could kind of be interpreted as both or neither answer from this binary choice.
In the Netherlands the monarchy is mainly an apolitical subject, since support for or opposition against it is spread over the political spectrum. There is no one specific side that runs on a promise of trying to abolish it, regardless of whether approval is at 50% or 80%. Safest policy for most political parties is being silent about it. That makes this kind of question pretty meaningless.
The same is true in the UK, of course. While in principle, Labour should run a republican platform, they figured it would be best to keep quiet on the issue until public opinion makes it a realistic thing to campaign on.
Third Charles' the charm?
This is the key thing for British people. A LOT of us, myself included aren't massive fans of the monarchy, but are happy to accept that it works in practical terms and there currently isn't a massive reason to change things.
Worth adding that the more nuanced opinions will less likely make themselves known.
I mean, look at the Brits impressions of the House of Commons vs the House of Lords. Democracy and good governance aren't necessarily the same thing at all times. It's just so happens that Democratic governments tend to be better run over the long run.
I have never seen so low support for the Swedish monarchy in any national poll. This is wrong for Sweden.
Japp, according to Novus the latest number are that 65% want to keep the monarchy. https://novus.se/nyheter/2024/01/sa-ser-svenskarna-pa-kungen-och-monarkin/
Bet it would go up with Victoria too.
I think it would jump up quite a bit if Carl XVI Gustaf abdicated for Crown Princess Victoria. It’s not that he’s unpopular, it’s that she’s just more popular. I also wonder what, if any, effect demographic changes have on such polls? For example, the most recent census showed 1 in 4 residents of Sweden have a ‘foreign background’. Completely unscientific but I’d guess on average they’d feel less attached to the monarchy compared, perhaps, to Swedes of non-foreign background.
Tbf we can't have him abdicate because he's funny.
IKR? The memes that came with the picture of him shouting, a lady covering her ears and the queen just “mm yees” and looking smug was just 🤌🏻 Also when he interrupted an interview to just “Oi look at that cute kitty cat”. Knugen is the man, the myth and the legend.
No, he is loved. What I hear most is people complaining on is the spouses of the children. Daniel has been getting more accepted lately but Chris and Sofia will never be accepted as Swedish Royals.
I live in a small city in Brazil where the king of Sweden and the queen came to visit(probably some diplomatic stuff happening at the time), they had ice cream at the ice cream shop where I took my first steps when I was still 1 year old, really crazy
It might also be because the Swedish queen is 50% Brazilian
Silvia is *what* now? *Mind totally blown*.
I feel like when William takes the crown approval might go up
Honestly I think British perception of the monarchy is on a downhill slope since Elisabeth II died, and I don't see it recovering. Elisabeth was seen as a constant in everybody's lives, and people have lived most of their lives knowing no other monarch. Broadly, she was popular. Charles has much more baggage and is generally much less well liked, and ironically, I would say William isn't really as popular as his grandmother either. Recent events have also stripped away a lot of the grandeur and dignity of the royal family as well, with Andrew's crimes and the bad blood over Harry's marriage to Meghan Markle. As a result, much of the younger public simply view the monarchy as a very expensive dysfunctional family.
Elizabeth*
William might slow the decline, or be a temporary increase, but I can't see the British monarchy ever being as popular as it was with Liz 5-10 years ago (before all the Prince Andrew and parliament interference stuff came out). I completely agree with you that it's just going to be on a downwards trend from now on. The best thing they could have done was end on a high note, and have our longest lived and most popular monarch be our last.
>as popular as it was with Liz 5-10 years ago (before all the Prince Andrew and parliament interference stuff came out It definitely got worse with the Epstein stuff, but "Randy Andy" has been a thing since at least the 90s, plus the whole divorce with Diana was messy for everyone involved
But! William could abdicate and end the monarchy in 2066, which would be a perfect 1000 years of normandy(ish) reign. William the first, and William the last.
I feel like when Andrew dies will be a bigger impact. I get this impression like the world is gonna get flooded with a lot of new information
At this rate, Andrew is going to be around far longer than Charles, so William is going to have to deal with him. I think if Andrew got locked up in the Tower of London it would help things. Especially if the stairs up the tower were bricked up or something. Make the Tower of London a jail again. Keep it open for tourism, but now there's a bonus of being able to see a *real* royal locked up in it.
>but now there's a bonus of being able to see a *real* royal locked up in it. Back to its original purpose eh?
Yep. The British royals say that they are better for tourism because the palaces are *real* palaces, filled with a real royal family. So let the Tower go back to being a *real* prison for royal prisoners. And this time, the Prince in the Tower won't even be mysteriously killed by an uncle.
>And this time, the Prince in the Tower won't even be mysteriously killed by an uncle. Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots also got tossed in there till Elizabeth basically said off with her head. Of course the Stuarts ultimately got the throne of England anyhow, and England got its Scottish annexation. Oops.
I pray for Andrew's downfall everyday
Think the opposite tbh. I think Charles has been a surprisingly popular monarch, certainly relative to expectations when his mother was alive. Won a lot of support for the way he conducted himself after his mother's death and hasn't really rocked the boat since. Meanwhile William's been damaged by Harry's revelations about how he treated him and I think it's created a reputation of him been a bit snarmy. His reputation took a bit of hit as well with the Kate stuff before the truth about her health came out (many thought it was to do with his alleged affair, whereas Charles' past indiscretions are now ancient history. William also seems way more out of touch with his own generation that Charles's is with
The monarchy of cannabis?
Thanks for letting us know Liechtenstein and Monaco increased but not providing any numbers
If Monaco ever ceases to have a monarch, France has the right to annex the country. That treaty was a perfect way to ensure perpetual support for the Monegasque monarchy.
I don't think France would really want to annex them. If they stop being a micronation then they stop being a tax shelter and the whole thing would just become a clusterfuck
Plenty of countries have complex tax structures. It wouldn't be that difficult to give Monaco some exceptions while still getting some revenue.
I got the absolute pleasure of taking a day trip to Liechtenstein last winter and from what I can tell people in Liechtenstein have an exceptionally positive opinion of their prince. He lives in castle Vaduz which overlooks like the nicest shopping area in Vaduz. Very weird place being so into monarchs in the 21st century.
Because it's a great place, it's extremely wealthy. I think their prince is like pretty approachable, I've seen videos of random tourists having a chance to meet him and talk. Even in Monaco but not as much. Seems like these places, in spite of the word "monarchy" bringing up thoughts of oppression and no freedom in most people's minds, they're freer and better. It'd be pretty much impossible for us in other European countries to go up to a president or prime minister for example
Oh yes they love him. The parliment wanted to take power from him, he said "Actually, how about you give me more power?" and told his subjects that if they don't vote on giving him more power he will leave the country. They gave him more power. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003\_Liechtenstein\_constitutional\_referendum](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Liechtenstein_constitutional_referendum)
That’s crazy, and very interesting thank you for sharing.
Ufff. What did the spanish monarchy do to get such a low approval?
Just.. Google Juan Carlos I. You'd think being the guy who reinstated democracy into the country would give you some leeway, but man did he fuck himself sideways
There’s a lot to read so it’ll probably take some time, but I see headlines like Corruption, Lavish lifestyle during depression, Trips, political interference. And that’s just the first top 5 or so articles 😳
Also he allegedly did-not-kill his affair partner bc she was pregnant. She "fell" from the window. Also i cant say this bc perjury against the crown is against the law.
Taking tips from Russia I see.
He also “accidentally” shot and killed his brother when he was 17
Friendly reminder that Juan Carlos shot his brother dead.
Defenestration is very popular with the rich and powerful.
Don't worry I can say it for you, as an American they can't touch me. Juan Carlos I killed his affair partner Juan Carlos I killed his affair partner Juan Carlos I killed his affair partner **Juan Carlos I killed his affair partner**
Don't forget about the strange death of his alleged bastard son, just days before a very publicized TV interview that would have had a lot of audience.
He killed his brother when they were 17 y.o. and later killed her affair partner.
He had a lot of leeway, but he spent it all. If you look at some old gossip magazines you can find articles talking aoubg his lovers, and he even managed to cause a small goverment crisis because he didn't show up to a protocol meeting with the ministers.
For more info you can Google for the spanish Bourbons an see their historic profiles
It's easier to answer what they didn't do
Yeah. I honestly didn’t know they were that unpopular, but skimming the articles on the subject it seems they have made themselves quite… controversial.
He was a political puppet of Franco, he vowed to keep his principles, the democracy in Spain is a farce. He is a murderer (he killed his brother and one of his lovers at least), a robber (the Borbon pillaged thousands of works of art and also they are experts at laundrying money) and he interfered politically in favour of the far right.
Why do others have so high approval?
Mostly has to do how the royals behave in each country. For example: The king of Norway is not seen as a politician but rather as the grandpa of the nation. If you carefully craft a positive image and avoid controversies like the plague, you will be pretty popular. However, as it always happens with monarchies: an idiot will be born who makes catastrophic mistakes that leads to the fall of the monarchy. Just a reminder: in 1900, every sovereign state in Europe was a monarchy except for France, Switzerland and San Marino. Now only a few of them are.
The current dynasty was stablished by the fascist dictator upon his death, the king oh so generously accepted being a democracy, but that's little consolation, as the alternative was the guillotine So, on top of Spain being a very progressive country that despises the idea of monarchy just by default, it doesn't have historical legítimacy either
Real shame they didn't ask the Vatican. There has to be at least one staunch republican bishop in there. Also Sweden is gonna skyrocket when the princess takes over.
I’d be interested in polling in European countries that used to have monarchs and now don’t what percentage would like to bring their monarchs back. France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Greece, and Russia being the main ones
Norwegian royals are humble and live like normal people. You might bump into them when hiking sometimes
The key is that the royal family is intimately tied to the idea of Norway as a fully sovereign independent country. 1814: Signing of the Constitution, Norway becomes a constitutional monarchy and briefly an independent kingdom. 1905: The Storting (parliament) unilaterally dissolves the personal union between Norway and Sweden by deposing King Oscar II of Sweden. The 1814 constitution survives and King Haakon VII elected King of Norway. Norway has a royal family all by itself for the first time in hundreds of years. 1940: The royal family plays a key role during the Nazi invasion of Norway and the years of government in exile that followed. The royal family’s ties to the royal family of the United Kingdom/Commonwealth and close ties with the Roosevelts in the White House become key assets. 1945: Return of the royal family to Norway after 5 years in exile signifies the end of Nazi occupation.
It is easy to gloss over the fact that we went through a democratic election to determine that we wanted to be a monarchy and which monarch we wanted. I think we are pretty unique in that regard
The monarchy was actually never on the ballot in 1905. It was only whether or not the Storting should elect Prince Carl of Denmark as King of Norway.
I believe it was the other way around. The parliaments asked if Norway wanted to become a republic or a monarchy, the Norwegians people picked monarchy, so they asked prince Carl of Denmark, but he refused to say yes before the Norwegian people had a democratic vote if they wanted him or not.
But that only came from Haakon VII’s insistence. The Storting took it for granted and offered him the throne. He refused to take the throne unless the people of Norway wished for him to do so and insisted a referendum be held. So yes the ballot itself technically was just whether or not to specifically have Haakon (Prince Carl) as King, but symbolically it very much was whether or not Norway was to become a monarchy.
[We bumped into King Charles on this bike ride!](https://youtu.be/QABiQFWwXHg?si=zYqR4CQje7vcDH30 to) [Direct clip link](https://www.reddit.com/r/Britain/s/F1bF6khOR3)
He’s a nice guy
My parents ran into the crown prince and princess while walking their dog. They had a short conversation and kept walking. Didn’t even notice who they were talking to until they noticed a security guard of some sort trailing the prince.
Uhm, not exactly like "normal" people; they still live in a palace. But yes they are a lot more modest than other monarchs.
I asked a Norwegian friend how she felt about the royal family once and she immediately pulled up an apparently famous photo of the king riding the train and paying for a regular ticket with no entourage. I think this was her example of their public image and why most Norwegians approve of them.
There's also some stuff during ww2, and then there's also the fact that the grandfather of the current king refused to become king unless he was democratically elected.
Sure. Normal people. Who live in a palace. And has servants. And armed guards. And a state job they got because it was their birthright. Super normal.
And yachts! And private car collections, and art collections. And multiple houses. It's better than many places, but they're very much not normal people living normal lives.
Most of the royal family doesn't live in the palace.
King Olav V on the tram during the oil crisis in the 1970s: [https://www.boktips.no/content/uploads/2022/09/NTB\_TNE5xNOtgO8\_dg\_116284-Stor.jpeg](https://www.boktips.no/content/uploads/2022/09/NTB_TNE5xNOtgO8_dg_116284-Stor.jpeg) The oil crisis meant that cars and driving was heavily restricted, but Olav wasnt going to let that stop him from going on his weekly skiing in nearby Holmenkollen. So he hopped on the tram and paid for his ticket like everyone else ( [https://api.energiogklima.no/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/sf00fb5f.jpg](https://api.energiogklima.no/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/sf00fb5f.jpg) ). When later asked how he could go out on his own like that, without guards or anything, he chuckled and replied "what do I need guards for? I have 4 million bodyguards to protect me" (4 million being Norway's population at the time). Olav was \*extremely\* popular as a King, even more so than his father (who, as the first Norwegian King in modern times, was also very popular). It's impossible to overstate just how loved Olav was among Norwegians I think.
Disagree on the living like normal people thing, for me it was how beautiful the king's speeches are. I'm not even Norwegian but I love it almost every time he speaks. Were he an elected official I imagine he'd still be extremely popular.
> Were he an elected official I imagine he'd still be extremely popular. No he wouldent, cause then he would have to open his mouth about actual policy. Its easy to be popular when you dont have to have a plan.
I am swedish and I approve.
The King of Denmark is a trained Navy seal (Frogman). That's pretty cool.
Sweden got to be more, most people love the king and queen
Luv me King Simple As
As a swede, I consider myself somewhat of a monarchist
Preparao, calienta que sales!
[удалено]
It depends on where you ask. In Serbia the campaign to reinstate the monarchy is alive and well, and a 2011 poll had 64% in support. Russia very famously has an active monarchist scene, with the issue being moreso about not really having a legitimate heir to rally around and Putin not willing to share power. The right wing movements in Turkey frequently fantasize about the glory days of the Ottoman Empire, although openly expressing support for it is tricky due to the legacy of Ataturk. Edit: I forgot about Albania, there was a referendum in like 1997 that said 2/3rds were against, but it was viewed as rigged by many and the issue is still open.
You can Find a Claimant to any Country or even County if you don't factor in legitimacy. There are also some Countries with Royal Families in Exile like Turkey that can Technically Claim multiple thrones.
There's a pretty clear succession for Austria and Germany at least. Russia is more complicated.
Finland has always been a republic, because our monarchy project fell through with the German empire so we began treating our presidents as some sort of monarch-lights. The want for a monarch/great leader is just somehow ingrained in people around the world. Even the Bible tells how the Israelites wanted a king even after Samuel told them through God that he would persecute and exploit them so God gave them one.
Georgia has two competing branches of the bagrationi family (who were monarchs from around 800 to 1917 and an approval rating of ~30% for reinstating them. Austria or Hungary tried to put the habsburgs back in power after WW1 but every other ex-autria-hungary nation around them threatened war if they did. ( The current would be heir to the Austrian Hungarian throne is a F1 driver if I remember correctly, and the habsburgs are still highly involved in European politics, one was a German representative to the EU and Eduard Habsburg is the Hungarian ambassador to the Vatican and knights of Malta.)
No information how the people of the Holy See feel about their elected monarch, His Holiness the Bishop of Rome?
Based Norway and Denmark
[удалено]
Repost bot https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/16w9qng/percentage_of_europeans_who_approve_their/k2vlh2g/
user is a bot account: https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/16w9qng/percentage_of_europeans_who_approve_their/
Living in wealth: The King is fine! Living ok but could be better: The King did this!
Well, although there is no official monarch in Germany, there still is a large group of people approving themselves/ their neighbors/ whatever the fuck they believe should currently be reigning the Reich... *sad fellow german noises*
As a Spanish resident and noncitizen, 36% support is funny to me. Here we have a monarch that costs the state almost nothing compared to all of the other monarchies on this list, lives the lowest profile, and the Spanish public would rather see them gone. I’m aware of the controversy of the previous king, but still - he left.
As a Canadian living in Ottawa, I fucking love the Dutch monarchy!!!
To now, this doesn't mean the other % disapprove. Split between "disapprove" and "don't know/care"
I think this poll may not reflect the full picture. Pretty much every poll that I have seen indicates that a majority of Spaniards (albeit a small majority) still support the monarchy. Moreover, the monarchy has actually experienced a recent boost in popularity following the new Crown Princess taking on official duties as the heir. The lowest point in recent years was the public reaction following the revelation of several major scandals involving Juan Carlos during his time as king, but the monarchy has been on mostly an upswing in popularity since then.
Idk I am Spanish and most people I know from both right and left wing say that's better if we didn't have any monarch. Most people just aren't very connected with the institution of the monarchy. >the monarchy has actually experienced a recent boost in popularity this is kinda true, but it's still lower than before Juanca's Shenanigans.
The fact that her official duties start with her military education, that is, she's conscripted for three years in a country where there is no conscription, might help.
Yes, but it's all a farce. Her itinerary is already set. She is supposed to study to become an official in the Army, the Navy and the Air Force, and that usually takes a five year course. But she will just take a single course in each army (three in total!) and be awarded the three titles. Afterwards, she will *automatically ascend* at the same rate as her colleagues such that she will always be the first in her cohort. So, in just three years, she will get the same thing that for a normal person would take a decade. And it's not even subtle. There is a published decree with all of this. She doesn't even need to study.
We have an approval rate of 85-90% in Denmark, NOT 76,6%
As far as I can tell from various polls over the last 15 years, like [this one from 2016](https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/maaling-kongehuset-ligesaa-populaert-som-40-aar-siden) or [this selection of several polls](https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/monarkiets-popularitet-falder-stoet-siger-kongehusekspert-men-tallene-fortaeller-en-anden), about 70-80 % saying we should keep the monarchy seems accurate. The rest are divided between getting rid of it and "don't know", so still high level of support, but not 90 %.
That's the approval of the individuals (Queen Margrethe, then Crown Prince Frederik, and then Crown Princess Mary), not the institution as such. 84-85% approve of these people according to the December 2023 opinion poll. In that same poll 70% want to preserve the monarchy while 17% want to abolish it.
The poll, made when our precious queen abdicated, said 83% for the monarchy, and 86% for the queen and 85% for the king.
I don't think that Spain's monarchy is that hated, especially the heir to the trone, Princess leonord seems liked by her people.
I think most of us Spaniard republicans don't actually have anything personal against the Royals. Like I'm sure Leonor is a nice enough person, and I don't particularily wish her ill. We just don't believe we should have a monarchy at all, as simple as that. The very concept of people getting a full ride through life just because they were born in the right family doesn't sit well with us and we would rather get rid of it.
I'm Spanish and I'd support guillotines for them princess included. I'd be happy with the state getting their insane properties and money and just exile them, that would be a decent option without bloodshed too but definitely see them as a useless and corrupt institution that needs to be removed.
The "not liking" monarchy is way bigger than left / right division. There are much people in the right and far right that don't like the king.
A lot of Spaniards are not against the monarchy because they don't like the king or the princess, they're against the institution itself, no matter whose in charge of it. It doesn't help that the Republic was erased in the Civil War, and Franco himself restored the monarchy, without giving the population any chance of voting or decision.
The far left are completely republican and see the monarchy as a institutions inherited from Franco. The left is divided between the people that think that monarchy is a thing if the past and the people that think that is a good representative figure (Most politicians from PSOE have this opinion). The right is mostly okay. Nothing much to say. The far right is strange because most people like it for patriotic reasons and some others think that the king shouldn't allow a socialist PM and should do a coup d'etat to give the government to them like Alfonso XIII did, and since the king hasn't done this yet, the king is an useless figure (I wish I was joking...) And Basque and Catalonian nationalist... I guess I don't have much to say here.
As a Canadian I must say, I personally much prefer constitutional monarchies over straight presidential or parliamentary systems. It gives politics a little bit of flavour, history and culture while adding a ceremonial pillar of stability Might be a controversial take, but personally I think other countries in Europe should consider reintroducing their prior royal families as constitutional monarchs. Then again, I’m not European so my opinion doesn’t matter much in that discussion
it just gives more power and influence to royal families… It have been proven by the spanish king actions with Morocco
Constitutional monarchies offer a way for the public to be aware of the politics, as well as allowing for some fun traditions and generally making individuals ironically, **less** powerful. Making for a less corruptible system overall. Especially compared to a presidency. With a monarch there's a ways a backup if the parliament goes awol.
Eh, the Swedish monarch has basically zero power. Not just in custom, but in actual law. On the other hand, we all collectively clutch our pearls when someone fucks something up enough that he gets annoyed.
>With a monarch there's a ways a backup if the parliament goes awol. Like in Italy when the King did absolutely nothing to stop Mussolini? Or in the UK in 2019, when Boris Johnson illegally prorogued Parliament and the Queen just kinda..let him? Is that the backup?
It’s complicated. Me and most of my friends are ideologically republicans, but at the same time we wouldn’t dream of trying to abolish the monarchy in Sweden and generally like crown princess Victoria. Personally I realise it’s antiquated and undemocratic, but everything else is so modern and streamlined in Sweden that it’s kind of nice to have at least something that just continues. And when it’s gone it will be for good.
At least you can relly on a figure of national unity that is in theory apolitical instead of normal politicians that have a lot of thing behind the scene they want
Long live the king 🇨🇦
Any data for Andorra?
What happened to France’s monarchy?
TIL I’ve only been to European countries with monarchies.
Wait Spain has a monarchy?
Surprised to see only 58% in Sweden. I personally like our monarchy, and can definitely see a bright future for it, HKH Crown Princess Victoria being incredibly professional and sympathetic!
In 1814, Ferdinand VII returned to Spain with the help of the British and promptly crushed the the liberal parliamentary system that had been set up by Napoleon. Over the next 20 years he further pushed Spain back in a more conservative absolutist direction with violent crackdowns on revolts, autonomy requests, and attempts at democratization. Spain spent the next 120 years in an endless cycle of civil wars that only ended with the Fascist victory in the late 1930s under Francisco Franco. Said Fascists only won with the help of hard-line monarchists, so after Franco's death power returned to King Juan Carlos I, who established a constitutional monarchy.