Should Norway become a republic?
Hell no. Hell no. HELL NO.
Norway has the distinction of having a pretty decent royal family - not much corruption, no pedos, no crazy sex-parties, no extra-marital affairs and an heir to the crown that looks terrific:
I realize that monarchy is inherently unfair. Ordinary people can more or less choose their vocation, but someone who is groomed to inherit the throne has lost that freedom. What if you could have cured an incurable disease, or written an unforgettable novel or a symphony that would move hearts until the end of time? But instead you are doomed to entertain celebrities from other countries and inaugurate projects that have nothing to do with you personally. Or perhaps you just want to have a good time on your own without too much responsibility. It is not easy being a king or queen!
Nobody in their right mind would want to oust our old King. The current Crown Prince, who is already assisting somewhat, seems to feel that he can do something good in the world by his high profile. And the populace agrees, with a few exceptions. But if none of his kids again want to be monarchs, we'll probably just quietly transition to ceremonial presidents. (That is, if nation states are still a thing at that time.)
But if Norway becomes a republic, we better pick people who are not politicians. Because the last thing we need is American conditions, where the formal leader of the nation is a daily reminder of the disagreements within the country. Our monarch is the symbol of the country's unity. And the current royal family is doing a great job of it. They are pretty much universally loved both by those who grew up with them and the many who have settled here more recently.
It depends on what we'd replace the monarchy with.
The king in Norway today is a representational figure without any political power, and indeed even without any publicly known political opinions beyond the banal and (near) universally agreed on.
There's an air of history and tradition surrounding the royals that adds greatly to ceremonies and symbolic acts. And in Norway in particular, the history of the royals has had to do with independence and freedom. Handing out medals, honouring veterans, taking the tram and so on. It's just not the same when it's performed by an elected official – and when we elect those officials, we should be thinking about their policy agenda, not about how good they will look cutting ribbons or waving from balconies.
The monarchy is a relic of an age that we're all glad is long gone. The only purpose the monarchy serves today is to offer up some sort of continuity in times of crisis, for the people to rally around.
I say keep our monarchy as long as they do their job well.
It is somewhat calming to know that we have something/someone who can represent Norway above political devides. I for one, would have been devestated if the only ones representing me and my countrie were someone like Trump and company.
The monarch today has a possibility to represent the people of Norway across and above partisan lines. An elected seremonial president could do the same, but it is hardly cheaper and probably doesn't really work better.
Of course the monarchy is an anachronism, but the Norwegian monarchy works, it is popular and has shown itself to have an ability to reinvent its purpose, so why not hang on to it as long as that is the case. We, and they, all know that they "rule" at the mercy of the people, so if the monarch no longer fullfills a positive funktion in the society, monarchy will end in Norway. It poses no threat to our democracy.
Let us keep it a little longer .... :-)