The British royal family is a royal family with a long history and rich culture, and it is an important symbol and tradition of the United Kingdom.
In today's world, most countries have a capitalist or socialist political system, but the United Kingdom is a special example, it is a capitalist country, but it also retains the monarchy of the feudal era, there are 29 such countries in the world, and their political system is called a constitutional monarchy or monarchy**.
The British royal family is one of the most influential in these countries, and every major event attracts global attention, such as the wedding of Princess Diana and Prince Charles in the 1980s, known as the wedding of the century, which was broadcast live by more than 700 million people.
Even the death of Queen Elizabeth caused a huge sensation in the world, which shows how influential the British royal family is.
But in addition to the influence of the British royal family, people are also interested in their luxurious life, it is said that the British royal family's spending in 2020 reached more than 69 million pounds, according to the annual growth rate, the annual expenditure of the British royal family is now at least 70 million pounds or more, which is equivalent to 6300 million.
With such a high expenditure and no political power, the British royal family can neither interfere in the affairs of the first country, nor can it command the first and the army, so why does Britain use taxpayers' money to support a royal family with no real power?
British royal family. 
The head of the British royal family is the king, but the essence of the king is the king of England because the United Kingdom is made up of England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
Before the unification of England, these four regions had their own kings and nobles, but as England became stronger, the kings of the other regions were conquered or married by England.
In 1800, England and Ireland signed the Acts of Union, merging the Irish throne with the throne of Great Britain, and the King of England was born, but his full title was not the King of England, but the King of the Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
Later, Ireland** became Southern Ireland and Northern Ireland, and when Southern Ireland became independent, the full name of the King of Great Britain became the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the King of England became the symbol of the unity of the four regions of the United Kingdom.
Although he has the title of king, he does not have any real power, because in 1688, the bourgeois revolution in England led to the signing of the Bill of Rights, which completely deprived the king of his power and allowed Parliament to replace the role of the king.
So since there was a bourgeois revolution in England at that time, why didn't the king just abolish the position of king?
This is because the British at that time had already regarded the royal family as a country's faith, and the thousand-year-old monarchy had been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people, and forcibly changing this situation would only cause opposition and disgust.
In order to stabilize the mentality of the people, gain their support, and maintain the king's position in their hearts, it became a necessary move at that time, and later with the colonial expansion of Britain, especially in the era of Queen Victoria, Britain became the most powerful "empire on which the sun never sets", and Queen Victoria also became an idol in people's minds.
But in fact, the queen has no power, just a symbol, and it is precisely because Britain was once very powerful that people regard the king as a memorial to the glory of the past, which is also a normal thing.
George VI. 
Take George VI as an example, his reign coincided with World War II, when Germany was unstoppable in the Western European theater, and even defeated France, the first in Europe, to surrender, and drove the Anglo-French forces to the sea, if it were not for the Dunkirk retreat, the German army might have landed in Britain long ago, changing the history of World War II.
But it was at this critical moment, as a nation's faith, that George VI quickly played his part, helping to maintain domestic unity, mobilizing the people of the whole country in the war, participating in the fight against Germany, and rejecting the proposal to flee to Canada, choosing to join the British people in resisting German aggression.
In the incessant bombing of London by the German army, George VI still chose to stay at home, which immediately greatly boosted the morale of the British people, and successfully defeated the strategic objectives of the Luftwaffe in the later air battle of Britain, helping the Allies to gain an advantage on the Western Front and maintaining the dignity of the British crown.
For the British, the King of England at that time was proof that a country was still alive and well, and the core that united the people at home.
After the end of World War II, George VI's daughter Elizabeth II succeeded to the throne, and the Commonwealth organization, as a continuation of the British Empire, continued to maintain the last honor of the empire on which the sun never sets, and at its peak, this organization covered a quarter of the world's land and had a population of more than 2 billion.
As the monarch and head of state of the Commonwealth, the King of England has a very large international influence, and if there is no king, then the Commonwealth will have no meaning of existence, so in order to maintain its international status, Britain will naturally not abolish the British royal family.