Royalty poll results!

Festival2-WeeklyPoll-Header

There are two halves to learning about the news: the first half is getting the skills you need to be able to form and share your own opinions. The second half is the knowledge you need to understand news stories.

An important part of having the right knowledge is about knowing the most important keywords.

Because news stories about royals link to so many others, there are a lot of keywords!

This gave us an idea for this week’s poll! This week we want you to think about the question...

For this poll we asked you to share how you felt about the following statement:

Which of the following keywords is the most important for discussing royals in the news?

The results are in and here's what you thought:

Fest 2 StudentHub-PieChart (6)

Comments (59)

You must be logged in with Student Hub access to post a comment. Sign up now!

  • I liked that Charles III was the King of Britain because he said in his first speech to the British people from Buckingham Palace, King Charles III pledged to serve the people of the United Kingdom and other regions and territories throughout his life, recalling the commitment made by his mother, the late Queen Elizabeth II, on her 21st birthday .
    And he kept his mother's footsteps, and he said
    As the Queen herself has done, with such unwavering devotion, I also now solemnly pledge, for the remainder of the life that God has destined for me, to uphold the established constitutional principles of our nation. He added, "Wherever you live in the United Kingdom, or in Dependencies and Territories throughout the world, whatever your background or beliefs, I will endeavor to serve you with loyalty, respect and love, as I have done all my life."

    1. Yes, I agree with you. I liked his speech very much, as that speech comes from his whole heart. I wish he was true to what he said and carried out everything he said.

  • Tradition and history are the most important for discussing royals in the news. Tradition and history are similar because traditions are beliefs passed down from generation to generation. These traditions are what make up the history of a group of people. Traditions originated from the past and were passed down to the newer generation and history deals with things that have happened in the past. There can be no history without tradition and vice versa. Tradition is important because it reinforces values and strong work ethics while also creating lasting memories. History can help us recognize the contributions people made in the past, which allows us to appreciate them even more and leads us to say thank you.

    1. I agree because... it's true if there is a country based on tradition it is about history and past

  • I believe that royals should not have absolute power to do whatever they want, and I would like my country to have a royal because when a country has a royal family ruling, everything is under control, and the country is more civilized, and the king or queen can grant the needs of the people while also listening to their people's opinions.

    1. The King or Queen would listen to people's opinions, but it would be much easier and effective if power was dispersed, for example, in Nigeria, the government is divided into three levels; the Federal, State and Local governments. This way, administration is made easier. I do still think that there is no problem with symbolic or ceremonial royalty, like the British.
      We also have royalty in Nigeria, but they do not have political power. they are the traditional heads of the people, for example, the Ooni of Ife, the Alaafin of Oyo and the Olu of Warri.

    2. I disagree because having a royal family under control of what the country does can either be a good thing or a bad thing. I think this because there can be a dictatorship and the people may suffer.

      1. I agree because... Yes, after my research on the types of monarchical rule, there is dictatorial rule, and this type of rule destroys the people in the full sense of the word. They possess 6 bad qualities, which are refusal to admit mistakes, taking scapegoats, summoning slavery, lying, and withholding information. These qualities are enough to destroy an entire people.

    3. I disagree because Not every king who ruled will be just and keen on the responsibility of his people. Perhaps there is a just king who meets the needs of his people and does not greed for money  but since we are talking about a hereditary monarchy, this means that we do not guarantee how the rule of the Crown Prince will be  will he take his father as a good example, or will he tend to his lusts? When every person has money, he appears for what he is, whether he is greedy for money or otherwise therefore, I believe that it is better for the monarchy to be through elections so that all the people can be satisfied with its rule.

    4. I agree with you that members of the royal family should not enjoy absolute power because this would be bad because if they enjoyed absolute power they might not listen to the opinions of their people and also they would issue inappropriate laws that are not commensurate with the people's demands and if laws are issued that the people are forced to abide by, this is possible That leads to objections and it is possible that these objections lead to the destruction of society

    5. Hi gracious nature, I agree with you that royals should not have absolute power over people and the country but , however I do not understand your want for a monarch many countries including my own run very smoothly under the rule of a president or in my case a Taoiseach and our government and personally I would rather have someone who had to work hard to get to their post instead of someone who was just simply born into it.

    6. I agree because I agree with your opinion that the royal family should not enjoy complete power, and also that it can rule the country and help and develop it. In my opinion, they are like ministers and assistants to the president in the presidential system, and otherwise they can change the king's thinking if they are consulted and the right decision is taken.

    7. I disagree because you say you don't want the royals to do what they want but then say you want one to take control? In my opinion, there is no point for a royal family as you cannot vote for who can be royal, causing it to sometimes be terrible people. So I feel like it should only be presidents and prime ministers because they already have a team what is the point of choosing a family to rule royalty over all.

    8. I disagree because... first of all I believe that the constitution guides the system of government in which a country operates and if a country is limited without considering the mode in which it is acceptable and suitable for it to be governed, it may end up having some problems. For instance it does not necessarily imply that absolute power does not have its own advantage, in a monarch system of government the use of absolute power can aid greatly due to the fact It makes law making easier and there's only one person who gets to make the decisions. The royals, in their various country should decide based on the constitution of the land and system of government, considering the effects and the benefits of adapting to the mode of absolute power.
      Regarding the fact that you want your family to be ruling through a royal mode of hierarchy, I think you should consider the fact there would need to be clear separation of power to avoid tyranny, dictatorship and also without separation of power I don't the king and queen would be able to take up all of the affairs of the country with ease. Also I believe you should consider if it would be good or not for a country to adopt the ways of the absolute power as royals.

  • My nationality is Palestinian, and we Palestinians elect our president, but I was shocked when I learned that Jordan, our neighboring country, follows the monarchy, so I asked how they tolerate injustice, but when I delved deeper, I learned that the monarchy is a beautiful system in which understanding spreads, but in ancient times it was There are unjust kings, but now I don't think there is any unjust king, so what do you think about monarchy or elections is better?

    1. Can you provide evidence for there being no 'unjust' kings now?

      1. Thank you for your comment I can answer your question: I think there are very few unjust kings because if we run for nomination and elections, the people will choose the right person, and they certainly know the qualities of this person. Will he be responsible and fair and provide them with what they need Then they elect him, and in my opinion, the elections are much better. We can object to any injustice and re-election to choose a new king or president who is better than the one before him and settle on those who benefit us and be the best among them.

      2. I do not think that there is sufficient evidence. If I find a just king, then on the other hand there are ten unjust ones, and if he is deceitful with one group, then there are ten groups that he oppresses. Arabs in Western European countries, and these behaviors are not the people responsible, but rather it is a decision issued by governments, such as the decision to ban the veil that was issued there in view of human laws, so no one has the right to prevent you from choosing your religion or practicing religious rites, and the veil is considered a religious ritual and is considered part of Arab culture No one, even if he is a president or a king, has the right to restrict personal freedoms, and the matter is not limited to Muslims, but there are many groups that are exposed to injustice and racism, but I wanted to direct the light on this marginalized group

        1. Yes, of course, there are many unjust kings, including the President of Syria, Bashar Al-Assad, and the President of Egypt, Al-Sisi, who are tyrants, oppressors, and dictators. They practice the most severe forms of torture against their people, such as killing, execution, disappearance in prisons, and exile of the innocent. This large number of victims and the results of wars are many of the scourges of wars.

          1. Yes, your words are correct. In addition to that, they allied with people who are not from us and force their people to do things they do not want. I have friends from Syria and Egypt who tell me that they suffer from injustice to the extent that philosophers and thinkers went out to speak and insult their leaders, and the next day you see them dead.

      3. I do not think that there are unjust kings, because I see the President of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, and the President of Egypt, al-Sisi, as tyrants, oppressors, and dictators. They practice the most severe types of torture against their people, such as killing, execution, disappearance in prisons, and banishing innocent people. That large number of victims and the consequences of wars are many of the scourge of wars.

      4. Unfortunately, the monarchy is unfair to us for the following reasons:
        1- Using the force of law badly against the people, not the criminals.
        2- They have no control over the use of the people's money. Unemployment and corruption spread.
        3- Lack of freedom of expression and opinion. Whoever disobeys our king will be imprisoned or killed. It was a great injustice.
        4- The king sets a new law that suits his own interests, not the people. This is happened in Syria ,Morrocco and Lybia>
        I don't mind having a king and queen. But they should not have absolute power over the people, and there should be oversight over the actions of the kings.

      5. When the Queen of Sheba told her people about the impact of foreign monarchs entering invaders in a country, where the result is that they corrupt her and insult her family.

        In fact, this is a summary of what any colonization does in any country: corrupting the country, humiliating the people

        1. Yes, but this is not our issue, but colonialism will help you do worse than that massacres, imprisonment, executions, mass massacres, and a lot means that what they did to it does not represent anything in the rest

      6. Your question is very wonderful, and I will answer you, but I do not say that there are no unjust kings. I say that the king knows whether he is an unjust king or just by his actions only, that is, if he inspects the conditions of his subjects and they do not have shortcomings and many other things, then this is a just king, but if he does not know anything On behalf of his subjects and deludes himself that he is giving them what he wants, this is an unjust king. I heard from my grandmother saying that there was an unjust king that no one always knew who was sitting on his throne and did not ask about anyone. The king said to him, "Get out of my face, I do not diminish anything from my subjects." After a few days, the king felt remorse, so he decided to go to the popular market in disguise. His palace and he was deeply remorseful, so he ordered that a bouquet of gold and money be distributed to each family. Every king must ask about his subjects and do good to them

      7. In my opinion, there is no era without injustice, so the biggest evidence of the existence of injustice in our societies is that the king or president has great wealth and they have everything he wants and craves, while in the same country we find that there are very large numbers of famines, and the matter is not limited to this only, but even education and medicine They are affected by this, as with regard to medicine, hospitals do not have the medicines or equipment needed to treat diseases, even if they are found, they will be very expensive. How can we not call this unfair?!!

      8. From my research, many modern monarchies have a constitutional framework that limits the power of the monarch and gives more power to democratically elected governments. In these systems, the monarch serves as a unifying figurehead and represents the traditions and values of the nation.

        Moreover, in many modern monarchies, the monarchs have worked to promote social causes and humanitarian efforts. For example, Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is known for her involvement in various charitable organizations and causes. King Felipe VI of Spain has also been involved in various humanitarian efforts, including promoting peace and reconciliation in the Middle East.

        It is important to note that even in modern times, there have been instances of monarchs engaging in unethical or unjust behavior. For example, in 2017, the King of Saudi Arabia, Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, was accused of ordering the detention and torture of Saudi princes and businessmen as part of an anti-corruption campaign. It is important to continue to hold those in positions of power accountable for their actions, regardless of their title or status.

        In many countries, monarchies have evolved to become constitutional monarchies, in which the king or queen has a largely symbolic role, and the real power lies with elected officials and the government. In such systems, the monarch is expected to act in accordance with the law and the constitution, and not to exercise unjust or arbitrary power.

        There have been cases where monarchs have been accused of acting unjustly, even in modern times. For example, in Thailand, there have been protests against King Maha Vajiralongkorn, who is accused of abusing his power and living an extravagant lifestyle at the expense of the Thai people. Similarly, in Saudi Arabia, there have been criticisms of the ruling family's human rights record and its treatment of political dissidents.

        It's worth noting that the idea of an "unjust king" is subjective and depends on the values and beliefs of the society in which the monarch rules. In some cultures, the idea of an all-powerful monarch may be seen as legitimate, while in others it may be seen as oppressive. Ultimately, whether a king or queen is considered just or unjust is a matter of interpretation and debate

    2. I disagree because I think that no matter what there has to be unjust kings that do not regard their people many people do not notice because they have not seen those countries that do suffer under unjust royals or have undermined the situation , to me of course you can not know everything that is happening around the world because not all people have the time to actually settle down and enlighten themselves on what is really happening in the world particularly relating to this topic the type of government that is governing each country not even only those with kings and queens but even those with presidents and prime ministers . So in my opinion there are still many unjust kings out there maybe not just known about.

  • I think equality is the most important for discussing because if there is no equality between the royals and the people, they will feel bad.This will lead to hatred and people may end up killing the royals.If there is no equality, the royal will be at a high risk of losing their life most especially the king/queen.I was suggesting that there may be equality.All people should be treated alike.

    1. I agree with your opinion, because showing equality and justice between people and the royal family is a very important thing, and also the royal family must provide rights for its subjects and not despise anyone so that people do not have an argument when they turn against the royal family, but rather with this behavior the love of the subjects for the royal family increases and they will feel
      With great interest from the royal family, as they provide their rights to live in safety and happiness

  • We did a festival lesson about kings..... It was interesting and useful for us..
    I have learned that kings have a prominent role in managing the affairs of the people, meeting their needs, protecting the people from colonialism, and training armies in the best way to prepare for major wars. I added to that that they provide security and safety for their society..But in our current society, every king has become more interested in himself than his people. . All he cares about is saving money for himself, not for his people. Humanity and spirituality have gone.. from the hearts of kings. Time walks by us, and we think that we are the ones walking towards time. The more time passes us, the more kings neglect their people.
    This is how life is. As we grow older, we neglect cooperation, love, and safety.
    But today, what are we going to do? Today, the people are advising their kings instead of getting advice.
    Topics may appear in news stories about royalty such as
    Videos of thanks and signs of encouragement for these kings.. or.. videos about the kings neglecting his people or not caring for them.
    The king must take into account that he is a shepherd and he is responsible for his subjects and his people..

  • I can't choose, every word counts, but I think equality is the most important. There is no monarchy in my country, but there is in Jordan. I do not see that this system achieves equality. The members of the royal family are superior to the people and enjoy more privileges than the people. They are not equal, and in Saudi Arabia the king has complete power. I do not think it is appropriate for people not to participate in the selection of laws and decisions. There is no justice in the king's rule until his death. Let's suppose what if the king is unfair. Will people continue to suffer for the rest of their lives? I thought they would immigrate to another country, and after reading some research, I realized that the disadvantages of the monarchy outweighed its positives. I prefer elections as there is freedom for the people and the choice of who will govern them

    1. Your comment is nice, but I have another opinion. Now you mentioned the negatives, and not only you, but all the comments are talking about the same thing about injustice and inequality, but you haven't seen what they are doing for their people. Now Jordan is a well-known country among the Arabs and economically advanced, and the most..Its residents are in an excellent financial position, but you didn't ask who its president and the royal family are. All this thanks to them. They also do their best to live the most beautiful life. If the presidents were unjust, as I said, Jordan and Egypt would not have completed their path until now
      They would have become weak and economically backward countries that do not export or import, there are few job opportunities, famines occur, and sometimes they are unfair, but we also do not forget their interests

      1. You are welcome, and I agree with you on that, and I appreciate the efforts of all the just kings. I also know that ownership is a double edged sword with pros and cons. I said that in my previous comment that its negatives outweigh its positives. Did you know that the former king of Iraq was unjust and used execution and other unjust kings? It makes sense to live with these kings

        In my personal opinion, making the king ruler until his death, after which the crown prince comes, is an unfair decision for the people. The people must choose the king who will rule over them. They must know his qualities, whether he is just and generous, or unjust and miserly, and is he a responsible and competent king for this position, as he does not look above his people.

        We must live in security, achieve justice and equality. This system should never be applied. Let us assume that the Crown Prince was unjust. He does not allow his people to take their salaries. He does not give them their rights. He treats them in the worst way. He distinguishes his family with many privileges. Is this permissible?

        Have you looked at the negatives of this ruling? Have you thought about the rest of the countries that are ruled by unjust kings?

        1. Yes, of course, I know the negatives, but I did not find anyone mentioning the positives

          And I have a response to your comment, and I found many people when they mentioned the negatives saying that if the king is unjust, he continues to persecute him until his death.

          And I propose a solution to this problem, I find that it should be a new system of government, that is, when arbitration is made for a person to be king, he must rule for only 5 years, and if people see that there is a change in the state and he rules with justice
          He is voted on by the people after the end of his rule, to continue or to stop

          And if he were to cease another person should be appointed and the same system applied to him

          I think it's a great idea
          Because the king will do his utmost to strengthen the state in all respects in order to continue his rule

    2. I agree with you , equality is very important. Royal families should show this to the people in order to be respected. But l think that the royal family in Jordan is some how good in dealing with people. For example, when the Jordanian king's daughter married, last month, we didn't see high level ceremonies. All wore simple folklore clothes and we didn't see jewellery round the Queen's neck or hand. Also I can feel that people were very happy with the royal family from their comments on the social media .

  • I think that the most appropriate word is power or authority, because it confirms the possibility of the king and queen to sit on the throne throughout their lives, even if the entire people objected to this. And there are examples in ancient history, such as the Romanov family that ruled Russia, as it clung to the rule until the people revolted, suppressed and killed it, and from the modern world there are many people who object to the rule of the British monarchy and believe that it should end with the death of Queen Elizabeth II, but who Despite this, King Charles will be crowned against their will

  • I think that sometimes the presence of a king in the country is a positive thing when he cares about the people and helps the poor, and it is a negative thing when he takes people’s money and oppresses the society and does not want any project for fear that the people will clamor and be expelled from the king’s throne.

    1. I agree because there can be a bad king or a good king. One who can make the people suffer at his command and one who can help out the country when it needs it most.

  • I think that the most important characteristic that a king should enjoy is equality. The king should enjoy this characteristic, so that there is justice among the people, and so that strife does not create and produce several factions, which causes racism in society, and this will lead to a revolution in society upside down. Which leads to colonization by other countries

  • I voted for Tradition because that is how I would describe Royalty. The Royal lineage is almost a tradition passed down for generations since 1066. Royalty, I feel, in each country is a national symbol. In my opinion, any country that preserves its royal lineage(for symbolic, not administrative purposes) preserves a culture transmitted for years.

  • In my opinion, one of the most important words for being a king is taking responsibility, justice and altruism. Why did you choose those words? Because they all mean that being a king / queen wears a crown and a life of luxury, but this is not the reality, as kings spend their lives learning etiquette and royal behavior, and their lives are not as ideal as we imagine, as they cannot befriend or even enjoy privacy or go anywhere. This is what we do not see from their lives I don't think learning how to bow or dance is essential to being a king. What you have to do is be yourself, rule justly, favor your people over yourself, be worthy of the word of a king or even the respect of your people.

    1. I agree with you, one of the most important words for being a king is taking responsibility and justice, but also the tradition is relevant to royality, the way of behaving and belief that have been passed through generations, his appearance in front of his people and his participation in celebrations and events and in tourism.

      1. I did not say that traditions are not important. I realize that every family has its own traditions, but there is nothing wrong with change and renewal. This is what I meant. Let me explain it to you in another way. Imagine if you continued to eat the same food for a week. It is horrible. The royal family is not supposed to abide by customs and traditions. They can express what is inside them, as these traditions may be the barrier in front of them to express their opinions. Each person has a distinctive way of thinking that must be shown. This idea may be one of the reasons for increasing the state’s economy or even increasing the number of tourists or making it a historical achievement, so people do not dare to change any of their collective habits. Rather, some bring it to the point of sanctification, and some customs may be an obstacle to thinking and ambition, so parents try to cultivate customs and traditions for their children as if it is an integral part of their identity and personality until they grow up and they adapt to it and do not alienate it. Eastern society, due to its keen interest in customs, does not see difference and diversity as an advantage, but rather sees it as a dispute and problems. Deviating from the customs of society is not easy; Rather, it requires strong determination and will because the person will face strong opposition from society, because society tends to settle for what it is and is afraid of change and the consequences of change. Anyone who tries to deviate from his habits and think far from his customs and traditions, “thinking outside the box” is what turns ordinary people into scientists. Famous and distinguished people came up with Einstein, Edison, Steve Jobs and many others.

        1. Thank you for your explanation, I like the part you mentioned as thinking outside the box, this really creates leaders, geniuses and scientists Also I agree with you about the benefit of change and renewal which was the slogan of the Egyptian revolution against the republican system, and it succeeded in changing the president.

  • The word I choose is history because royalty all over the world each has a long run of history tied to them. The history of monarchy can be bad or good depending on the ruler during that time or other factories. This history can affect the future and determine if there is even going to be a monarchy in the future. The British monarchy is an example of a monarchy that has been around for a very long time and also shows how slowly over time power can loosen but popularity can still stay consistent. In the end history is what remains and it could be taught or left in the past.

    1. I agree with you regarding history. The history of the royal family is very important. For example, through history, we can know whether this royal family is fair and just, or vice versa. I think that if the history of the family is full of defects and bad things, bad images will spread about the royal family and it will distort it, and the people will not accept the ruling. It will be objected to by fleeing in terms of teaching the history of the royal families. It is important for the students and the people to know how these governments behaved and what are the best governments that they should choose. The histories of the royal family can also be good, so students benefit from it.

  • HISTORY; This is more important in discussing royals because history is one of the major aspect to be considered when discussing about the royal family.

    1. I completely agree that history holds great importance in discussions about royals.Understanding the historical background is essential for comprehending the significance and impact of the royal family throughout history.It allows us to delve into their stories, roles, and the societal influences that shaped them.It offers us a glimpse into their past, revealing the challenges they faced, the decisions they made, and the impact they had on the societies in which they ruled.

  • Personally I feel equality is the most important and relevant to the question because everyone should be treated the same and helped in the same way! Homeless people or people in poverty are not given enough equal rights. The intervention of the rights of children should take place in every country yet it isn't. These countries are not treated with equality. The royal family should promote and talk to the countries which don't have money, child and adult rights.

    1. I agree because being a royal, you should know that it is a privilege and you are to maximize that privilege to the most of your capacity. You should know that there are many people who feel your role is pointless and that it is a force promoting inequality but instead of listening to their criticism, prove them wrong, show them that you have a use show them that you can bring about change there are alot of bad and wrong that you change with the privilege of your status instead of being a force of inequality, be a force promoting equality there many countries where children and adults are denied their rights due to some difficulties but you can correct that you can make a difference it doesn't matter if you have been denied political authority, you can still make efforts to influence some government policies that may not favour the public you can use the privileged of your status and stand as a voice for the masses show them that you care for them and that regardless our various status, we are one and we should stand for one another always.

    2. I agree because... for a Monarch to be just, he/she must learn how to treat people equally and be fair to them. He/she should have empathy for the people of his/her country or community.
      Royalties are suppose to promote charitable organizations to help the less privileged and vulnerable members of the society to in order to reduce hardship

  • I thought and thought and found that no word was unimportant, but I think that justice is the most important thing any king should have. The king must ensure that justice is achieved in his country and punish any lawyer or judge who does not achieve justice, and of course all. This is for the sake of serving the country, for the safety and security of the state, and for the growth of patriotism in the country. Especially in the hearts of children.

    1. I agree because justice ties in with a lot of the other keywords like equality, fairness, power and so on. All of these keywords are important in royalty but i believe that justice is one of the top because justice should be considered a basic building stone wherever the monarchy is practiced.

      1. Can you give an example of how justice can be a building block?

  • Sure, here are six topics related to royalty and King Charles III of Britain, along with examples and evidence to support them:

    The Role of Royalty in Modern Society
    Royalty has long been a symbol of tradition and heritage in many societies, but what is the role of royalty in the modern age? King Charles III of Britain, for example, has taken on a more symbolic role, representing the nation's history and culture. However, some argue that the monarchy is outdated and unnecessary, especially given the high cost of maintaining royal households. Others point to the economic benefits of tourism and the sense of national pride that the monarchy can inspire.
    Evidence: The British monarchy is estimated to contribute over £500 million to the economy each year through tourism and related industries. Additionally, a 2021 poll found that 62% of Britons believe the monarchy is still relevant to modern society.

    1. Can you share where you found the numbers in your evidence please, outspoken_climate?

  • When I heard the word king, I thought of the ancient kings who used to live in Egypt and they enjoyed a unique life where they were carried on heads and they were refreshed by the good smell of the Nile River that revives life and gives it a new spirit

  • When a country has a monarch, it must not necessarily mean that they have ruling power. For example in the United Kingdom, the monarch doesn't hold any political power, the royal family can't even make political statements in public. Though the royal family attract a lot of tourists to the country which is quite beneficial. I think we can all agree that having a monarch can be a good thing if their powers are limited. For example, a president is managed by the legislative branch, but in a country that has absolute monarchy, the ruler is supreme and no one can regulate their powers.

  • I think it's difficult to pick just one word that is most important for discussing news of the royal family but I can say that it has been done justice
    The word justice could be an important keyword for discussing royal family news depending on the specific news story and its focus. For example, if the news story directly involves a member of the royal family and their judicial performance, then justice may be the main focus of the coverage. However, it cannot be generally stated that justice is an important keyword for discussing royal family news as it varies depending on the specific news story and the focus of the coverage."

    1. I believe your right, because all the words there are relevant to discus especially when we are talking about royals. But you are right, justice is the word we should be talking about, if we were to bring all the these words; Royalty, Popularity, Racism, Colonialism, Wealth, Equality, we are directly talking about justice. Because justice means being just or fair to everyone, because everyone deserve justices.

  • Also, from my point of view, some kings, if they enter a country or a village, will make the dearest of its people humiliate them, and they will do so by imposing some laws!

  • I believe that the king should not be any king, but rather be able to assume the responsibility of an entire country, so he must have some necessary qualities that he must be a king, and the people must say their opinion about him and why they chose him and not others

  • I think the most important quality a king should have is that he be wise. He judges between people with justice, offers advice to his people, hears their complaints, and pardons the wrongdoers, because if he is wise, his people will love him. The people's love for the king is the most important thing in the matter. If the people love their king, they will abide by his rules and instructions and speak well of him. Congratulations to every people who have a wise king.

  • I am absolutely thrilled to discuss this topic !
    All of these keywords are important but I think fairness is the most important one.
    The royal family has long been an iconic symbol of elegance and sophistication ,
    but I think it's not fair ! because how can anyone be born into such immense privilege without putting in any effect ?
    Why not give all the people the opportunity to seek the post of head of state ?
    Where is equality and democracy !?
    Being born into affordability affords individuals a myriad of opportunities and advantages ,and that is the thing which I wanna talk about ,
    Why not anyone can have all these advantages?
    Why not give the opportunity to someone who is capable of taking this position ?..

    1. I agree, all of these words are important when it comes to mentioning the royals. Royals are born into a life of wealth, popularity, and privilege. But when it comes to putting their role into effect, not all royals are using their position effectively. This makes it unfair and makes this system outdated compared to other systems in the modern world.

    2. You are not wrong, and every person has the right to become what he wants, and also not everyone decides what he will always become, and this is not fair, but do you think all people want to become kings to take care of their people?? Let me make it more clear. There are many people who want to rule the kingdom for the sake of fame, money, domination, etc. But when the royal family rules, the matter will not be new to it. To make it clearer, when you have a modern car, but you have owned it for a long time, the matter will be that you ride it because you want to arrive. For a specific place, but if someone recently bought this car, he will most likely want to be proud of it, and this is what I mean, and I think that the royal family is used to appearing in the form of a king and wants to rule fairly in its people and improve its state, and this is what I think, what do you think?

  • All of these factors should be the basis of the state, but there is something essential, which is justice. If this factor exists, I think it will result in many factors, such as equality

  • Well I think I royalty is the most important word when discussing about the relevance of royalty simply royalty is the status of a person and most people who get this status are people who are born in the royal family and I think this power status makes some people to lose sight of what royalty is it is meant to be in which the appointed leaders are to help promote development in the society, have good and able leadership and be loyal to their followers but now because of what some past monarchs have done in the past people expect history to repeat itself and that is why people are so against the leadership of a nation by monarchs because there is less chance of the people to have a say in the affairs of the nation and I know that people are saying that monarchs are outdated, old-fashioned and irrelevant in the modern society even though that may be the case but they are still nation that are prospering under the leadership of a monarch such as Saudi Arabia and others so that means that it is not monarchy that is the problem but it is the people who are in charge and are seated on the throne.

    1. I do not think that people think that history will repeat itself, because the entire world has evolved, and as some assert that we will not go back, this generation also asserts that history will not repeat itself, as people have changed, ideas have changed, rulers have changed, and a great change has come here in the nation now

  • I feel that royals, monarchy, provincial councilors and so on can not be spoken about without mentioning the status of "inferiority" and "equality" in the country. The discrimination between royals and commoners is very clear and obvious. Royals are of a higher class than everyone else and are respected and paid for it. while commoners are normal, nothing special. They follow the rules of the royals and sometimes don't have a say. Another unfair fact is that some royals don't follow they rules themselves the ones they made and they are not punishable under law for the wrong they do while the citizens are. A lot of things concerning monarchy are unfair and unequal. Therefore I feel this should be pointed out in every article and worked upon to have a fair and just society for everyone.

  • I think that the word traditions is the most appropriate in the matter of the system of government because the system of hereditary monarchy is a traditional system, while the electoral system is a system since the modern era, so many kings depend on customs and traditions and accordingly rule the country. Some traditions control our lives as a people and determine our behavior as individuals.

  • Well, considering the matter, all of these words are appropriate because after a search I did, I found the following:
    1- The monarchy has existed since ancient times.
    2- That there were kings who were described as fair and equal, and there were racist and oppressive kings.
    3- There are some laws that are imposed on some kings, meaning that we cannot say that kings do what they like.
    4- In addition to all that I mentioned, we must not forget that kings have great wealth, and it is possible that many people may be disturbed by this matter. Actually this topic has been very useful to me and it has increased my culture and I am very grateful for that.

  • After thinking about it well, I asked my teacher about the property system. I knew its pros and cons, and in my personal opinion, the existence of a monarchy is not good at all. This affects several orders, including democracy, which means the right to give opinion and consultation. In this system, there is no right to give opinion because they remain the king until his death, and then the crown prince comes and this is considered A violation of human rights, but the most important thing that came to my mind is what if the king is unjust, will they suffer from it all their lives? Is this possible? I know that Iraq had a monarchy before they became republicans, and this monarchy was very unfair. He wronged his people and used execution after all of that. In my opinion, a republican system is much better

    1. Do you see a world where royalty and a republican system could exist together?

      1. It is possible that there will be a monarchy, but it is not the king who chooses who will be the crown prince after his death, but rather the people who choose, and this will give the people their freedom to choose

      2. Yes, it is possible for a country to have both a monarchy and a republican system, depending on the specific arrangement and limitations of the monarchy's power. Some countries, such as Spain and Sweden, have a constitutional monarchy, where the monarch has a largely symbolic and ceremonial role, while the actual governance is handled by a democratically-elected government. This means that the monarch has little to no actual power, and the government is responsible for making decisions on behalf of the people. In such a system, the monarch can serve as a unifying figurehead for the nation, representing tradition and continuity, while the elected government is responsible for making policy decisions and ensuring that the people's voices are heard. Ultimately, whether a country chooses to have a monarchy or a republic depends on the will of its people and their values and traditions.

  • In fact, there are many people who covet the king in order to prey on wealth, and at the same time there are some people who want to improve the standard of living of their country, so they want to become kings. I really wished to meet one of the kings to ask him questions myself about his opinion of royal life, and I also wanted to ask him that if he was granted a wish, what would he wish for in it? Will he wish for wealth or wish to live a normal and quiet life or what? And a lot of other questions running through my mind. I really wish I had such a wonderful opportunity.

  • One word!! That feature that includes and includes all sides must be available, and in my view, it is “Shura.” If this feature exists, then whoever is consulted cares about people’s opinion, and therefore he does not have arrogance and arrogance in his heart towards them. Also, whoever applies the Shura system does not bear responsibility Only, therefore, people receive harm with acceptance, the Shura system leads to a solution quickly, and there will be no opportunities for injustice in the consultation, for this Shura is one of the most important principles and systems that I advise to accept and adopt in countries

    1. Can you tell us more about Shura?

      1. Welcome
        Consultation means that you take the opinion of other people. My grandfather told me that in the past they used to consult on all matters for three reasons, which is where the responsibility does not fall on one person, but on all people
        And when we take the opinion of more than one person, two or three ideas are better than one idea, where ideas are exchanged to reach the best choice, and it is required that the people who consult have experience and have competence in expression and thinking.
        Do you want to know more about it ? Do you know about Shura and do you apply it in your society?

      2. Shura is consulting people whose opinions I trust in order to see their points of view. It is possible that my point of view is wrong, but their point of view is correct, so I will take their opinion

      3. Welcome..... The Islamic Shura is a system in which many men are nominated to rule the country, but the choice of the ruler is not through elections. Rather, the statesmen have chosen the best 4 or 5 Muslims, and then the Muslim clerics come and choose the best among them to rule the country, and I believe that There is no injustice in this system, and Shura is a system that was in the days of our noble MessengerIt is for the protection of the people and consultation so that the responsibility and judgment do not fall on the shoulders of the ruler

        1. Some people might say that all systems of choosing of choosing leaders have flaws. For example, in the UK the voting system is often criticised for not being fair. Are there any improvements that could be made to the system you've described to make it more fair?

          1. Thank you for your reply. We adhere to our own religion (Islam). There is no defect in the shura system, as it is an order from the Messenger, meaning that I will explain to you a lot and interesting things about the shura system, and shura is “asking or seeking an opinion or consulting about it.” First: As I said previously, it is the shura in choosing the ruler, which is for the jurists to meet and consult each other to choose the best of the rulers, and that was after the death of the Messenger, i. _______________________ Secondly: This ruler, who was chosen, is the one who will inspect the affairs of the people. He will roam the country from time to time to inspect the affairs of the people, from the poor to the needy, and to help them by providing money and supplies from the Muslim treasury, but this system does not currently exist in our country, but rather the electoral system. ________________________ And third: Shura protects the society and protects it from the opinions of abnormalities, defects, and shortcomings. ________________________ Fourth: It denies the ruler's system of tyranny and control. ________________________ And did you know that if this system was relied upon to choose the ruler in any country or state, we would have eliminated corruption and spread justice and peace, thank you❤️. _______________________

          2. Certainly, no system is perfect, and it's important to continually evaluate and improve our systems of governance. In the case of the democratic system, I described earlier, there are several potential improvements that could be made to make it fairer.

            One area for improvement is the electoral process itself. For example, many countries use a first-past-the-post voting system, which can sometimes lead to a situation where a party can win a majority of seats in parliament with less than a majority of the popular vote. To address this issue, some countries have introduced alternative voting systems, such as ranked-choice voting, which can provide a more proportional representation of voter preferences.

            Another potential area for improvement is the financing of political campaigns. In many countries, wealthy individuals and corporations have an outsized influence on politics due to their ability to donate large sums of money to political campaigns. This can lead to a situation where politicians are more likely to be responsive to the interests of the wealthy, rather than the broader population. To address this issue, some countries have implemented public financing of campaigns, which can help to level the playing field and reduce the influence of money in politics.

            Finally, it's important to ensure that all citizens have equal access to the ballot box. In some countries, voter suppression tactics, such as strict voter ID laws or gerrymandering, are used to prevent certain groups from voting. This is a clear violation of democratic principles, and efforts should be made to ensure that all citizens have equal access to the polls.

            There are several areas where the democratic system could be improved to make it fairer, and it's important to continually evaluate and address these issues to ensure that our systems of governance are truly representative and responsive to the needs and values of all citizens.

  • I chose the word equality. I think that when there is equality in the rule of a king among his people, his people will love him and support him in his decisions, and the people may agree to the continuity of the monarchy.
    (When the ruler is just, I believe that the Crown Prince was also raised on equality) and not to oppose him, as well as equality between the classes of society, for example, not to discriminate between them in governance, money, or anything else. Like this, so I believe the country will be cooperative and the country will enjoy progress, fairness, justice and stability. Inequality leads to problems and revolutions in the country

  • When it comes to discussing royalties all these word matter because there's no way you'll hear about royalty in the news without two or more of these words mentioned. Most royals are known for their popularity like King Charles III of Britain, power and wealth like king Salman of Saudi Arabia, History and traditions like Ambasador Ahmad Nuhu Bamalli of Zaria, Nigeria. But not all royals are known to be fair to their people. Fairness is the act of treating people equally without favoritism.
    I personally think that when discussing royals either in the news, school or gathering fairness should be the key word used in order to show how royalties are suppose to act and behave towards their people.

    1. I agree because many times in history you see that sometimes royals treat their people unfairly by unreasonable wage and other things. Royals should treat their people with respect since they are being treated with respect.

  • The roles of royalties are different in each country. Even if a royal is in control of a community or the whole country, they all have one thing in common which is power and wealth. I believe the royalties can use their power and wealth to raise the financial status of their country/community. Therefore power and wealth should be the most important while discussing royals in the news so that the world can see how royalties use their power and wealth to develop their community/country

    1. Hi harmonious_river, thank you for your comment. Can you think of any ideas of how members of royalty can use their power and wealth to help their country?

      1. The royals can use their power and wealth to bring recognition to major topics or to promote philanthropy. With their wealth, they could do more to support those in poverty and offer greater assistance to those in need.

      2. I have some ideas that I hope will be implemented. In fact, the kings have a very large wealth, and it is certain that they do not use all this wealth in their lives, so they, as a royal family, must take care of the basic aspects, which are learning, medicine, and other aspects. An experienced educator...etc. As for medicine, they must provide the equipment needed to treat patients and medicines, and hospitals should be equipped with the latest tools and modern equipment in order to reduce the death rate. There are many things that kings must do to improve the standard of living in their country.

      3. Yes, there are several ways that members of royalty can use their power and wealth to help their country. Some of the ideas would be:

        Philanthropy: Members of royalty can use their wealth to support charitable causes and make a positive impact on society. They can establish their own foundations or donate to existing organizations that work to address issues such as poverty, education, and healthcare.

        Promotion of national identity and culture: Royalty can use their position to promote national identity and culture, which can help to build a sense of pride and unity among citizens. This can include supporting the arts, promoting cultural events, and celebrating national holidays and traditions.

        Diplomacy and international relations: Royalty can also play a role in diplomacy and international relations. They can use their position to promote peace and understanding between nations, and to represent their country on the world stage.

        Environmental and social responsibility: Members of royalty can also use their power and influence to promote environmental and social responsibility. This can include advocating for policies that promote sustainability, supporting clean energy initiatives, and encouraging businesses to adopt ethical practices.

        Support for education: Members of royalty can support education initiatives by providing scholarships or grants for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. They can also support initiatives that improve access to education for children in underprivileged areas.

        Healthcare and medical research: Members of royalty can support healthcare initiatives by funding medical research or supporting the development of new treatments and technologies. They can also support healthcare facilities and programs that help to improve the health and well-being of citizens.

        Disaster relief: Members of royalty can play a role in disaster relief efforts by providing financial support and resources to communities affected by natural disasters or other crises. They can also use their position to raise awareness and advocate for policies that support disaster preparedness and response.

        Small business and entrepreneurship: Members of royalty can support small business and entrepreneurship by providing funding or mentorship programs for aspiring entrepreneurs. They can also advocate for policies that support the growth and success of small businesses.

        Social justice and human rights: Members of royalty can use their position to promote social justice and human rights initiatives. They can advocate for policies that promote equality and fairness, and support organizations that work to protect the rights of marginalized communities.

        Members of royalty have the opportunity to use their power and wealth to make a positive impact on society in many different ways. By supporting initiatives that promote education, healthcare, disaster relief, small business, and social justice, they can help to build a stronger, more equitable, and more prosperous country.

  • The word "tradition" is the most important when speaking on matter concerning royals. A royal family is often the first way a country was governed, and in some, the way it still is. This deep connection with history makes "tradition" the most important word to use.

  • I think "history" is the most important word when bringing up royals. This is because royals are present throughout most of a country's history and are very deeply rooted in its creation and development.

  • I think the most important for discussing the relevance of royalty is equality and fairness because if people are fair to each other, Peace 🕊️ will overcome the world. And if people treat everyone equally everyone will live in peace not pieces, and more likely to understand each other.

  • Frankly, this is a difficult choice, because each of the words has a role and importance in achieving successful governance, but I think that the word that has the greatest role in governance is “equality and justice.” If the king is just and rules with justice, his thinking is not filled with any racial discrimination among the people. This country has established a fair and successful rule in its country, but since we are talking about the royal family, we know that the royal rule has some negatives that make the people feel that they are different from the royal family, as they do not have the right to set any law or to run for the presidency and to be elected. The president, according to a family member, is incapable of ruling ,unlike democratic rule, in which a member of the people is elected or nominated with competence and justice, and who, prior to his candidacy or election, issues fair decisions and proposed laws to follow if he is elected, then this fair thinking attracts the people to elect him as a head of state, to rule it for a period of time of approximately 4 years. Only then is the election drawn again, and at the present time we see many unjust kings around the world, which pushes the people to emigrate, or revolt against the tyranny of the king, like the French Revolution in 1789.

  • I agree with the statement of racism. I think royal families are treated in a special way. Their behaviours should always be under censorship. They should not behave as ordinary people. For example, it wasn't acceptable to the prince Harry to marry Megan because she is an artist. It's racism.

  • Every phrase, in some way, depicts the royals. When there is a public discussion on the royals, at least one, if not all, of these terms are said. However, the phrases equality and fairness strike me the most. The majority of royals live lives of fame and money, and they maintain a high level of etiquette and elegance in order to present a respectable picture to the public. Royals take part in events and other happenings to demonstrate their concern for the general populace. Though in contrast, not all royals are concerned with the views of the ordinary people. As a result, some people may believe that royals lead an outdated life of excessive luxury and fame.

  • I think that the wealth is the most important thing should be with royal family , because i believe that they will help the people of their state if they suffer from starvation or suffer from economic hardship , they can give people financial donations , and they can give people jobs to improve the economic situation, and many other ways.

    1. Hi faithful_lime, should we rely on the generosity of the Royals?

  • The first thing that comes to everyone's mind while hearing the word royalty will most likely be wealth. From the beginning of the concept of royalty, royal people have enjoyed various unequal and unfair rights and obviously the extreme concentration of wealth. The other people on the other hand suffered from racism but racism slowly reduced as time passed but royalty didn't and it just morphed into political leaders which maybe considered a more humane form of royalty. Still now the most popular example of royalty, King Charles has an estimated networth of 600 million pounds and that is just a mere estimation. The post being hereditary and not an elected one makes it unfair.

    1. I agree because the amount of wealth that they have compared to anyone else seems unfair. In a way, the fact that they are not elected means that their leadership is not chosen but imposed on citizens. Although racism may slowly be reducing, it is still apparent, even within the royal family (like with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry).

    2. I agree with the wealth thing because if you look into past rulers, you see them living lavish lifestyles with fancy jewelry and such, but you also think about how the royalty may have treated and or exploited their people, especially in a more impoverished country.

    3. I agree because being a part of royalty, is being with a wealthy family that has total power. Royalty is the highest possible class, the uppermost of the upper class. In fact, royals transcend class, since their position is not dependent on economic status. Not only are they (usually) very wealthy, they are intrinsically bound to the government of the country they live in.

  • I think that rulers such as royalty, should listen to the opinions of their people the most since they are the ones with absolute power. That way, the peoples opinions will be heard and will lead to a good country. I think the only downside is that the rulers are chosen by family which could be flawed if the future ruler is not a good person.

  • 'History' is the most important word for Royalty. The concept of royalty is centuries old. It originated with the feudal systems of medieval Europe. Under feudalism, there were a few very powerful landowners who acquired large amounts of territory through military force or purchase. These landowners became high-ranking lords, and one of them was crowned king. History explains it all, and the tradition keeps on growing bigger and bigger. For example if you were born in the royalty family, then you are already part of the royalty family. You could even be a prince/princess or king/queen someday! Royalty has been a very powerful family throughout the years. History repeats itself.

    1. Can you explain what you mean by "history repeats itself"? This is a very well-known quote and I'm curious to know what your interpretation is.

  • In my opinion the best key word when discussing about royalty is history, as the royal family has had a great history with tons of rulers who did well. Now the royal family here doesn't have much of a voice as they have to act neutral, but in the older times the kings and queens didn't have to agree with the government and act neutral and due to this Britain was at its biggest extent nearly covering 1/4 of the world. So as I said history is the most important word when describing royalty

  • I strongly believe the most noteworthy keyword for examining the relevance of royalty would be "colonialism" because I feel the notion of royalty is often tied to colonialism and the historical exploitation of resources and people in colonized countries by European monarchies. During the colonial period, European dominions often inaugurated instrument sovereigns in populated provinces to wield command and retain their supremacy over regional residents. This practice helped reinforce the idea of royalty as a symbol of power and privilege, while also contributing to the conquest and pressure of colonized peoples. Today, chats about the applicability of royalty often involve examining their historical links to colonialism and how monarchies continue to memorialize unequal governance systems in society., by understanding the role of colonialism in the development and maintenance of royalty, I think we can better analyze and critique the impact of monarchies on modern societies and work toward greater equality and justice for the better of us all, and guarantee a world of no concerns.

  • I think King Charles got all the glory of the coronation when Camilla was becoming queen which was just as much important as becoming king.