The British monarchy lives on through King Charles’ coronation, but is that a good thing? On May 6, 2023, Charles III was pronounced King at Westminster Abbey. On this day, he was presented as Britain’s “undoubted king,” according to PBS, but personally I have some doubts about the institution itself. Many say that the British monarch is a symbol of strength for the nation, but King Charles doesn’t project an image of strength. Of course, King Charles is the rightful successor to the throne because of how the monarch system works, but his ascent makes one wonder if the system is outdated.

The former queen, Queen Elizabeth II, presided over much societal change, but that had more to do with the span of her reign than her queenly prowess. Overall, the monarchy seems outdated for a country like Britain. What does King Charles provide to the country that would allow the people to overlook that? The best leaders can move their country with their words alone. Charles does not seem able to do that. He appears to have nothing to offer besides serving as a placeholder until someone better can ascend. And, if media reports are true that King Charles has trouble accepting his half-Black daughter-in-law, one wonders how he can be an inspirational monarch to the 1.5 million Black people in Britain (ons.gov.uk). 

King Charles has been called out by Megan Markle for his racist microaggressions. In 2021, Meghan Markle told Oprah that King Charles had commented on Archie’s dark skin color (people.com). Of course, his remarks may reflect unconscious bias, but Britain needs an anti-racist leader who will help the country advance. Britain needs to own up to its colonial history in order to move forward, but King Charles’ comments may hinder progress. 

Britain sees its monarch as a source of power and encouragement, and with Britain’s recent prime minister crisis, it would seem to need that strength more than ever. But King Charles III does not provide strength and encouragement. If Britain continues to be stuck in a revolving door of prime ministers, it needs a monarch that can hold the country steady. 

At his coronation, King Charles “wore a solid gold, bejeweled St. Edward’s Crown as he sat upon a 700-year-old oak chair” (pbs.org). The crown is a sacred symbol of British history, but it also makes one wonder if the monarchy is not outdated. Most of the jewels, which the British refuse to give back, came from the British colonies; in a world that is progressing daily, maybe Britain needs a new crown (firstpost.com). 

Britain has potential to model social progress, but the British monarchy is holding the world and Britain back from achieving that progress. In my opinion, the monarchy was outdated 100 years ago, and it is outdated now. We need countries that can be an example for the world, and with this monarchy, Britain is not that.