<doc.id=5024.a2>
<title> Long live the Majesty! </title>
The monarchy is always a recurrent issue of debate in Sweden. Some argue that it is an old-fashioned institution which there is no room for in today's Sweden. Others are stating that we would be better off with a president elected by the people. I am not so sure that they are right. Why change a concept that has proved successful? 
	The monarchy is a good symbol for our country. The royal family, and perhaps the King, Carl XIV Gustav, in particular, represents Sweden on various occasions both in Sweden and abroad. A representative of the royal family is often seen at openings of various kinds, attending exhibitions, engaging in different matters, and so on. As representatives of Sweden, the King and Queen Silvia, and sometimes Princess Victoria too goes on state visits. Queen Silvia is specially interested in children's rights and that is contributing to keep up Sweden's good and caring name in the world. Here in Sweden she even has her own fund, raising money for helping disadvantaged children. The King and his family is also politically neutral, and it is therefore suitable that they continue to be our representatives and remain symbols and spokesmen for our country.
	Some might argue that monarchy is out of fashion and that there is no place for a monarchy in a modern country like Sweden. I do not agree! Our monarchy is one of the oldest in the world and the whole institution is a fine example of keeping of traditions. The house is fabulously vivid, today as well as hundreds of years ago. This is not outmoded, it rather indicates stability, continuity and security in our country. It is an institution we can trust, and that gives a signal that Sweden as well is a country to be trusted. Imagine what it would be like if we were to elect a new head of State every other year! The United States has proved that elections could be a really confusing and tedious procedure. Also, apart from the fact that it is boring and tiresome to select a candidate, there might be a risk that Sweden would be entirely represented by men. Just compare with the United States and France for example, where there has never been a female president. A change in the constitution in 1980 changed the order of succession, so that the oldest child of the Monarch is to become head of State, like Princess Victoria. The House of Bernadotte is also well-known in Europe and the rest of the world. If we were to change all of a sudden, people would get confused and ask 'who is the head of State in Sweden, anyway?' It would also entail a lot of complicated administrational work if we decided to switch form of government.
	At last, I would like to point out the popularity of the monarchy in our country, and especially the popularity of our present Royal family. People trust their King and his family. It is not only here in Sweden they have gained popularity, but also abroad. Our house is very popular in, for example Spain where, according to a poll, they seem to like Princess Madeleine particularly much. This raises our status abroad, and makes more and more people aware of the fact that there is a small country up north called Sweden, which is worth counting on!
	By this, I should have proved that there really is no need to change from monarchy to republic. Our royal family is a splendid, well-recognised symbol of our country, it stands for stability and tradition and is very popular both in Sweden and in the rest of the world. Imagine the Nobel Prize ceremony and the party without our King! Imagine all traditions that would be lost, and how empty it would feel. As I wondered above: Why change a concept that has proved successful?
</doc>