Support for the British monarchy has dramatically crumbled in recent years

Many have joked this week that the left-behind Windsors will need to commission at least a dozen emotional-support polls in the wake of Prince Harry’s wildly successful UK visit. Harry made them all look like what they are: prissy, dull, lacking in charisma, petty, jealous, unimaginative and lazy. Well, funny story. New polling numbers landed in the middle of Harry’s visit, and the numbers are really bad. Hilariously bad, one might say.

Support for the monarchy has dropped to its lowest level since records began, with backing for abolition growing five-fold, according to new research. When the National Centre for Social Research first asked in 1983 how important it was to have a monarchy, more than four in five people – 86 per cent – considered it “very important” or “quite important”. Its latest survey found that only half, 51 per cent, now take that view.

Meanwhile, the proportion who said the monarchy was “not very important” or “not at all important” has risen from one in 10 in 1983 to around three in 10. Support for outright abolition of the monarchy has also grown, from just 3 per cent in 1983 to 15 per cent.

Alex Scholes, NatCen’s research director, said the latest data showed how public opinion had shifted over four decades.

“Support for the monarchy is now at its lowest level since our records began, with more people than ever questioning its future,” he said. “At the same time, when asked to choose directly, a majority of the public still prefer to keep the monarchy over moving to an elected head of state. This tension, between declining importance and continued preference, will be crucial in shaping debates about the monarchy’s role in the years ahead.”

For the first time, NatCen’s British Social Attitudes Survey also asked the public to choose between keeping the monarchy or replacing it with an elected head of state. A majority, 58 per cent, said they favoured retaining the monarchy, while 38 per cent would prefer an elected head of state. But the research shows a sharp divide across age and political groups. While 59 per cent of those aged 16-34 preferred an elected head of state, three quarters – 76 per cent – aged 55 and over said they would support the continuation of the monarchy.

[From The Telegraph]

It’s worth noting that this seems to be above-board data gathered by the National Centre for Social Research, as opposed to a manipulated YouGov poll of twenty Tory seniors. While they aren’t discussing methodology or the time frame in which the data was collected, feel certain that the poll was probably happening as people learned that Prince William plans to NOT live in Buckingham Palace when he’s king, and instead plans to hide out in Forest Lodge and perhaps Zoom into his meetings with prime ministers. It could be that the British public feels like “hey, if the future king doesn’t give a sh-t, why should we?” Plus, people have a general awareness of the sorry state of the royal family these days. While Charles gets a lot of well-deserved sh-t, he’s pretty much the only person holding this enterprise together.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

23 Responses to “Support for the British monarchy has dramatically crumbled in recent years”

  1. Brit says:

    I really wonder how long the monarchy will last because the press seem desperate to make sure the family knows they need the golden couple back. I don’t even think it’s for the advancement of the monarchy, it’s for the press, who are losing jobs and newspapers closing down. They can’t afford to wait until the Wales children get older, they won’t last another 2-5 years at the rate it’s going. They’re getting close to outright begging the family at this point.

  2. ParkRunMum says:

    Diana + Harry = endgame. Like Scobie wrote. And his book was not lurid or salacious. It was like subtitles for reality-deprived people.

  3. Ashley says:

    I keep thinking that, outside of GB News and the Fail newsroom, a lot of Brits (and we subjects here in Canada and other places) simply are not white and do not think that the actions of the Crown are respectful to their people in any way.

    And Britain is and has always been a mishmash of European and other ethnicities, cultures and subcultures. Just because there have been Germans in charge for a few hundred years doesn’t mean that their brand of hierarchical whiteness prevails.

  4. Mayp says:

    So, were these numbers released before or after Harry met with King Charles? I could see his courtiers freaking out and saying, quick, hurry up Charles and meet with Harry!

  5. jais says:

    So 59% of those aged 16-34 said they would prefer an elected head of state over the monarchy? That’s a pretty big deal. The thing is an elected head of state would never be given as much money as the RF is given. If the monarch stays the head of state, at the very least, why not reduce the SG money and detangle the duchy real estate from one family.

    • Lucky Charm says:

      In 30 years, that 76% of people 55+ that are in favor of keeping the monarchy, will mostly be dead and gone. George may never be King.

      • lungta says:

        I predict that the Monarchy will end with William, since he’ll do a grand job of botching it up, & calling it “modernization”.

    • Me at home says:

      That 59% figure for ages 16-34 is really stunning. I agree entirely about giving the duchies back to the people. Willy and Kate are doing their best to make that happen with this “modern monarchy” scam of vacationing most of the year and relying on social media and tweets for important national events like VJ Day.

  6. Miranda says:

    Honestly, I’m not entirely convinced that even Harry and Meghan could’ve done much to prevent this inevitability. QEII was accepted because she was elderly and pleasant enough and had played the role for her entire adult life, and firing Granny would’ve felt wrong. Charles was never going to be popular, not after what he did to Diana, and his cancer has almost certainly shortened his time on the throne anyway. William and Kate are not only charisma vacuums, but feckless as well, and their idea of instilling a sense of duty in their children is simply assigning them characters. Harry and Meghan are amazing humans, but they’re not SUPERhumans. They couldn’t be expected to do virtually EVERYTHING the BRF needs doing (and likely WOULDN’T agree to all of it, as part of the deal with the devil apparently involves feeding their kids to the tabloids). The monarchy’s death might have been a little slower, but it would still be dying.

    • Mel says:

      You’re right, Harry and Megan were never going to save them, maybe just delay the inevitable. Now instead of just a quiet “we’re done here”, it’ll be loud, drawn out and cringe. They will make it so because they’re deluded. Will would divorce Kate so fast……

    • Me at home says:

      Yes, WanK are feckless scammers, but I feel like the Sussexes would have brought sincere dedication and some color, two things that might have held this enterprise together for a few more years.

      But yeah, take away the duchies and the massive tax breaks, and put them on an allowance commensurate with whatever work they do. Willy can hide out in Forest Lodge and pretend he’s important to his remaining servants.

    • westcoastgal says:

      Those racist, sexist men in grey gave the royals terrible advice, they were short sighted and not in touch with how the world would perceive the treatment of Meghan. They thought their etonian elitist white privilege would protect the royals. People could forgive the queen, she was in her 90’s and on her last legs but Charles should have known better. The rest of the world don’t give a sh*t that you wear tails, top hats and fascinators, dress in fancy clothes and give fake medals. They are not impressed, the treatment of M&H exposed the royal family for who they really are. They still are digging their own graves if they can’t pivot and redeem themselves. Tea with Harry might be a step for Charles in redeeming his tainted legacy, we can only wait and see. William has a very steep hill to climb, old timers will die off and he certainly isn’t winning the hearts and minds of the younger generation. I doubt George will ever be king, maybe as a token gesture or minor figurehead. The monarchy seems to be headed this way now as it is.

  7. Morning says:

    To me, the “working” royals on the balcony picture look more like a board of directors than a family. I think people identify more with a family.

    Also, I don’t think William has shown himself capable of being king. I don’t know what’s going on there, but there is no indication that he has been training for the job.

    • booboocita says:

      One of the things (a very short list, granted) I liked about QEII’s reign was the overstuffed balcony at events like Trooping the Colour. It was sort of fun to see her children, their spouses, her children’s children, her cousins and their spouses and children, etc., all jammed in a relatively small space. It betokened a unity and family solidarity that simply doesn’t exist anymore. Now the balcony is sparsely occupied, and that with charisma-challenged, uninteresting, unexciting individuals. Chucky Boy obviously thought that he’d get more attention if he winnowed out the extended family and put himself and Queen Side Piece at the center of the balcony. Instead, he just emphasized how withered that family is.

      • tamsin says:

        Basically there is no royal “family.” There was no doubt that Queen Elizabeth was a matriarch. She held her family and relatives at least publicly in a cohesive group. Charles has rejected his only two children. There is no family. Charles is no patriarch. There is a man and his mistress. However, the monarchy remains. There’s just no longer a real family behind the institution.

  8. Becks1 says:

    I think this poll makes sense in 2025 and it seems like the numbers keep trending downward, which also makes sense. People in their 20s and 30s and even 40s today aren’t going to care that the queen mother stayed in BP during the blitz 80 years ago – and that’s going to be more of a problem over the next few decades as World war II itself fades.

    there’s tradition and then there’s being out of touch and what was considered traditional under a 90 year old queen is looking very out of touch with a 75 year old monarch and his lazy 43 year old son.

    • Me at home says:

      And particularly if Willy has shown us that his “modern monarchy” is going to do away with not just the ribbon cutting, but showing up for important traditions like VJ Day. WanK has already demonstrated that WWII is in the rear-view window for him.

      Problem is, Willy has no new traditions–or even meaning–to replace this. Willy and Kate’s “meaning” seems to be “We’ll show up at your event and eat your brownies, although this really isn’t my sort of thing, so you’re really lucky to enjoy my presence for a few minutes.”

  9. bisynaptic says:

    #DefundTheMonarchy

  10. QuiteContrary says:

    #Abolish the monarchy.

    It’s long past time that this institution goes the way of other dinosaurs.

  11. martha says:

    With today’s political sh*tshow in US + UK and turn to fascism world-wide, I’ve actually come to see the advantage of having a unelected head of state who is supposed to remain neutral politically and carry on through all the government changes. If nothing else, the continuity could be reassuring.

    BUT – you need someone who understands and accepts the responsibility. Charles does,. The way the monarchy conducts its business needs to change, but William is absolutely not the man for the job.

    Oh, well – I guess we’ll see. BRF is not going away anytime soon.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment