Tow #7: "The monarchy is at odds with a modern Britain" from The Observer

The British Royal Family has increased in size and has gained popularity since
this photograph was taken a few years ago, but some still believe the family
represents inequality, undeserved privilege, and is a threat to democracy in
Britain and the Commonwealth. 

For the past few years the British Royal Family has been in the spotlight, as the recent weddings, birth, and christenings of various members have all drawn much positive publicity. However, many still argue against the usefulness and effectiveness of the royals, claiming that British citizens deserve more rights and more equality.  This editorial from The Observer, featured in its sister paper The Guardian, argues the same and, being in a British newspaper, is clearly aimed at citizens of that country.  However, it does not state its point a way that would turn any royalist into a fervent republican.  Though many pieces with epigraphs include only one, this article seems to have two.  A photograph of the late Christopher Hitchens is inserted above the article, the words "Christopher Hitchens said we should emancipate ourselves from the mental habits of royalism" set beneath the picture. The second epigraph is at the end of the first paragraph, which states "As republicanism gathered a little wind in the 1990s... Ian McEwan announced: 'It is time to say boo! to the big goose.'" The title of the article might not be enough to clue some readers in to the subject matter, as after all, it could just be pointing out that the monarchy is outdated instead of practically calling for its end. However, these two epigraphs, each coming from a well-known British author, set the tone of the editorial quite nicely and make it clear what direction it is going in.To try to support their argument, the author of the editorial uses also political facts and statistical evidence.  For example, the author writes, "According to the campaign group, Republic, in the top 20 UK tourist attractions, Windsor Castle is the only "living" royal tourist draw... it only just creeps in at number 17... Tourists will visit whether or not we have a sovereign."  They also state "We have no written constitution, no right to call ourselves citizens.  In a time of alleged increasing transparency, the royal household is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act."  An argument is stronger when supported with hard facts and not just quotes from authors or emotional protests.  However, in this case, the problem with the above passages, as well as many others in the article, is that none of the information is a secret; British citizens know their place in the country and they know how their political system works.  As for the Windsor Castle example, it is probable that many readers would find it irrelevant; even the author states that there are "more serious points to make".  If the author truly wants to convert royalist readers to republicanism, they would be better off citing concrete facts about things that negatively affect and anger the British people instead of restating that which has been written down over and over and assuming that the British have no idea what is going on in their own country.

Link: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/27/future-of-the-royal-family