The law has gone into effect and Prince Felipe is now King Felipe VI as of about 2.5 hours ago. He’s now the youngest monarch in Europe–Willem-Alexander has 9 months on him.
Wiki’s already updated: Felipe VI - Wikipedia. God save the King!
So, what’re the pros and cons of keeping the monarchy in Spain?
Cons: The system costs a lot of money
Pros: The new King is a 6’4" leviathan with access to firearms who will single-handedly protect Spain from any invasion.
Well, first of all this is only my personal opinion – but here goes:
Pros:
(1) Given how my country is, a radical change of system for the government would, more likely than not, be accompanied by tremendous convulsions that would not be good at all for the country. The change from Francoism to democracy was radical, yes… But it was basically done from within the existing system (there are people who complain that that irreversibly taints the system we have now), and was done at a rather gradual pace. A relatively sudden change from monarchy to republic … I do not think it could be done without creating a mess in the process.
(2) The current republican movement in Spain does not look to the future, but to the past – towards a 2nd republic that has been granted mythical status in certain circles as a wonderful thing that was treacherously destroyed by fascist elements in the military, with the help of their dictator pals. However…
OK, it pains me to say this (being as I am the son of a man who fought for the Republic during the war, endured years of jail --and even a death sentence that was commuted at the last minute-- and spent most of his life in the “black list” of the Francoist regime) but… The 2nd Republic was an unmitigated disaster. Rife with fractionalism from its very inception, with the strongest parties being the proto-fascist CEDA on one side (which even won the elections in 1933) and the socialist party on the other (which became more radicalised with the passage of time).
The 2nd republic was also witness to some very serious revolts, the worst of which was the revolt of the miners in Asturias in 1934, triggered by the inclusion of 3 members of CEDA as ministers in the government. The revolt was bloodily suppressed by the army (under the command, by the way, of Francisco Franco, still loyal to the Republic).
A part of the responsibility for the defeat of the Republican side falls also on the Republic itself: In 1937 it had to deal with a “Civil War within the Civil War”. with pro-soviet communists fighting anarchists and trotskyists. The pro-soviet communists won, but mistrust (if not outright hatred) set in within different Republican factions. Having a case of “we are struggling together” does not help your cause.
So – coming back to my earlier comment… The Spanish Republican movement should stop looking to the past and should stop idealizing a mythical 2nd Republic that was by no means the wonderful wonderfulness they seem to think it was. They should look to the future, show that they have proposals that do not hark back to a flawed and failed regime, and show dynamism.
Perhaps the “Podemos” party may do something about that, but I am not sure about their real prospects. Yes, they had a good result in the European elections, but those elections are not really taken seriously by the people. The real test will come in 2015, in the Spanish General Elections. I am not so sure of their chances then.
Cons:
(1) A Republic is a more modern system of government, with the highest office of the land answerable to the people (if the president is not doing his or her job well, they can theoretically be voted out). You cannot vote kings out --usually.
(2) There is an argument to be made about lower costs for a Republic-- however, I don’t think it is really that cut-and-dried. Yes, you don’t pay the costs of maintaining the royals and their families for life. But ex-presidents usually get paid a nice pension, and usually they keep their security details even after leaving office. If you accumulate enough living ex-presidents that may add up in the end. Just an observation, nothing more.
Now, another thing – how much does the payments to the Royal family impact on the average taxpayer? According to the latest data I was able to access (for the year 2011)…
-8.4 million euros were budgeted for the Royal family.
-There were 19.467.730 tax returns.
This means less than 50 cents per taxpayer. Even if we take into account the amount of tax returns that end up with money being given back to the taxpayer, this transforms into about 1€ per “paying” taxpayer.
Less than the price of a coffee, on average. I would say that the economic load of the monarchy is not that onerous.
======
Spain has very serious problems right now, especially with corruption in high levels. Unfortunately I must say this: I do not think that getting rid of the monarchy would help an iota reduce corruption in the government.
Given how the world of politics works, I am afraid that no matter if you vote for them or you have them as kings, those at the very top will, more likely than not, be a bunch of assholes.
People who support a Republic do so from an emotional viewpoint. Nothing wrong with that, but I would appreciate if some of them would acknowledge that, rather than trying to justify their choice with somewhat disingenuous arguments.
Full disclosure: I am a Republican. However, I am also a firm believer in the motto that the great Terry Pratchett expresses in pseudo-latin in his “Discworld” books: “Si non confectus, non reficiat” – If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Is the current system in Spain so utterly broken that it needs fixing? I personally do not think so.
Not yet, at least. May it end up so broken that it will need fixing? Perhaps. It wouldn’t surprise me. But now is not the moment to be doing a fixing that may end up being more harmful than beneficial.
I think Ascenray may be making oblique reference to the many Europeans who snickered at America for making such a huge deal out of Bill Clinton’s infidelity. I recall some French and Italian press, in particular, that called America naive and puritanical for caring whether our leader was cheating on his wife. 
very interesting - thanks, JoseB!
Yes, thanks, JoseB - a good overview. Is the Spanish monarchy credited with bringing in significant tourist dollars, the way the British monarchy is by its supporters?
CNN.com’s coverage of the new King taking office: http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/18/world/europe/spain-king-felipe-vi/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
How’s the personal front as far PVIR is concerned, something which can impact monarchs. Been reading about divorce amongst his sisters,scandal and the less then staller background of his missus.
Not really. Tourists go visit Spain for its sun, its beaches and its cheap sangria, not to gawk at royal palaces and such.
Also, the Spanish monarchy does not provide income to the government in the way that the British monarchy does (the British crown owns vast tracts of land, and the rents from those lands amounts to a pretty chunk of change).
However, the Spanish monarchy is also cheaper than the British – 8.4 million euros in 2011 for the Spanish crown vs. 31 million pounds sterling in 2012 for the British crown.
Although from 2012 on, payments to the British royals were not taken from tax revenues any more, but from the profits of the land holdings of the crown (15% of the total, to be precise). In any case, that is money that the British government won’t be getting anyway. The difference is that now it does not come directly from the British taxpayer.
His sisters are an embarrassment, especially the middle one, Cristina – she has been linked to the (very) serious financial misbehaviour of her husband, Iñaki Urdangarín. She lives now mostly in Switzerland (although she still keeps a place in Barcelona, but she doesn’t show her face around Spain very much). She was not present at the crowning ceremony today.
As to Letizia, she is not from a very “noble” background, and she was a divorcee, to boot. However, most people don’t really care about that. As Nava said earlier, the ones who got their panties in a bunch about that were the people from the “ABC” daily; a bunch of retrograde and cave-dwelling rightists.
The “ABC” is not unlike the British “Daily Mail”, only with a veneer of pseudo-sophistication and believing that they are refined and high-class.
There were talks last year about marital problems between the then Prince and Princess.
Turns out that her majesty was once a cigarette girl.
They are a very pretty family. The little girls are adorable. How exactly is Leonor pronounced? Like Lenore? Or more like Eleanor without the e?
Like the zodiac sign Leo and all but the final a in the name Nora.
lay-oh-NOR.
Tricky to explain to English speakers:
KG, problem is that Anglophones tend to pronounce “Leo” like we Hispanoparlantes say “lío”.
In OneCentStamp’s example the first syllable would not really sound like “lay” since there’s no trailing diphthong, just a short flat “eh” sound.
I was going for “approximate Anglophone pronounciation”, giving the examples she gave of Lenore and Eleanor, both English names. 
IPA is not tricky, especially for Spanish —
/le o 'nor/