- This topic has 144 replies, 41 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by BermBandit.
-
What's the point of the royals?
-
BermBanditFree Member
I think you are missing the point that the one behind the scenes is in fact one of these
too regardless of prevailing tie colour, and has been pretty much forever.miketuallyFree MemberFor UK politicians in the the 20 th C every PM till 64 was privately educated. We then had all state educated till Blair when we went back to private again. Does not strike me as good odd despite the brief hiatus of state school.
Chance of being elected UK PM vs US President is not “spin”, it is irrelevant, as pointed out above – you simply cannot aspire to be head of state in this country
Could the fact that we keep getting privately-educated PMs/Cabinet members/MPs be related to the fact that we have a monarchy? It constantly highlights the fact that one class is ‘better’ that the rest.
kimbersFull Membertheres only one solution
and fwiw i doubt we’ll ever be rid of them and i also dont expect to see an lected house of lords, i think the no to AV vote has let the powers be that know we are all perfectly content with out government
Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition
Latest Singletrack VideosFresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...BermBanditFree Memberthe no to AV vote has let the powers be that know we are all perfectly content with out government
Actually, it says more about what a total sell out the Lib Dems have been under Nick Clegg. The fact we have a coalition government even though GB made a bit of a cock up of his term as PM actually tells you much more. i.e. here it is on a silver platter….. oops even then you couldn’t get past the fact that people still remember what a bunch of ignorant self serving twunts you are.
No doubt the no to AV vote will be wheeled out to justify all sorts of things in the future, but it certainly shouldn’t be taken as a satisfaction poll.rkk01Free MemberDigressing from the OP – but to me, what the AV No vote signified is the total apathy, ignorance or entrenched traditionalism / inertia within a huge body of the voting public 🙄
deviantFree MemberAh good, every forum has one of these debates now and again.
I’m neither pro or anti monarchy but those who believe that abolishing the Monarchy will somehow create a sense of equality that has been missing from British society are surely being incredibly naive?
There are always haves and have nots….as others have said at what point do you draw the line?….my parents want to leave me their house, this is inherited wealth, why should i get their house just because of my birthright….is it fair that my mate whose parents dont own a house wont get one when they die?
If you go back far enough in British history you’ll find that the old aristocratic families got their estates by taking incredible risks during wars….sometimes by supporting the right pretender to the throne, sometimes by raising an army, often going into battle themselves….although their wealth and privilege now seems unfair you’ll find that at some point it was earned in the first place and then simply maintained and passed down from generation to generation….which i have no problem with.
ElfinsafetyFree Memberalthough their wealth and privilege now seems unfair you’ll find that at some point it was earned in the first place and then simply maintained and passed down from generation to generation….which i have no problem with.
So, you have no issue with someone or a group taking what they wanted, throught the use of violence, aggression, slavery and the denial of basic human rights to others then?
So, you won’t mind if I come into your house, beat and torture you, enslave you and your family, and take what you own as my ‘earnings’?
What’s your stances on looters?
deadlydarcyFree MemberEffin, you torture us daily anyway 😀
And you stole back that Yeovil town top off your ex…she got it for collecting glasses in Chard one night.
ElfinsafetyFree MemberAgain with the Yeovil Town top; oy vey. Enough already…
I don’t even know where what who why or how ‘Chard’ is. 😳
Swiss Chard?
I’ve bin to Swiss Cottage today, if it helps….
deviantFree MemberElfinsafety.
That was the way it was done then….appropriation of wealth that way today is rightly seen as abhorrent.
You are trying to apply the morals from hundreds of years ago to modern politics, it doesnt work.
Like is said, at some point ‘old money’ has been earned (however horribly by modern standards) and shouldnt just be taken away from somebody because of something their ancestors did….that just seems spiteful to me.
deadlydarcyFree MemberAgain with the Yeovil Town top; oy vey. Enough already…
I don’t even know where what who why or how ‘Chard’ is.
Well, she’s been on to me to ask you for it back…she says since she took the injunction out against you that she’s afraid to speak to you.
ElfinsafetyFree MemberLike is said, at some point ‘old money’ has been earned
Define ‘earned’.
You are trying to apply the morals from hundreds of years ago to modern politics, it doesnt work.
Erm, I think you’ve got that a bit topsy-turvey tbh…
and shouldnt just be taken away from somebody because of something their ancestors did….that just seems spiteful to me.
Tell me; your bike gets nicked, someone is found with it but they weren’t the one who nicked it. In fact, let’s just say they bought it in good faith.
Will you let them keep it?
ElfinsafetyFree MemberFFS DD…
I’ve got a Triestina top from Italy, she can have that and shut about it stupid cah.
BermBanditFree MemberDeviant, You are trying to apply the morals from hundreds of years ago to modern politics, it doesnt work.
There you go sorted that one out for you, now then you keep chucking them up in the air and I’ll hit em for you.
deadlydarcyFree MemberNo, she likes Green and White…
Is the Triestina top Green and White?
ElfinsafetyFree MemberNo, it’s red.
The colour of success….
Green and white ffs… so she’s a Catholic now? Oy, and indeed, Vey.
Actually there’s a Deportivo Cali top kicking about somewhere, let me have a rummage….
deviantFree MemberElfinsafety.
Yeah got the morals bit the wrong way round – typo, sorry.
Define earned?…hard to do, like i said in the previous post what constitutes ‘earned’ back then will be seen as theft by todays standards.
Some wealthy families made their money during Empire by exploiting people and resources from foreign countries…at the time it was seen as legit and nothing wrong with it…today its rightly frowned upon.
Conversely some ‘old money’ families have made a mint through legitimate means which would stand up to modern day scrutiny.What i cant stand about so called modern and fair society is how bitter and spiteful people get about inherited money and the obsession with the class system.
deadlydarcyFree MemberSome people exploited single mothers and used them as drug runners, then stole their football tops, thinking they were Plymouth Argyle kit. It doesn’t make it right though. 🙁
ElfinsafetyFree MemberWhat i cant stand about so called modern and fair society is how bitter and spiteful people get about inherited money and the obsession with the class system.
😯
I think the issue is that under the current system, society isn’t ‘fair’; it’s the perpetuation of inequality by the monarchy and class system that makes it so. Sure, society will never be entirely egalitarian, but ours is particularly unequal because those at the top of the pile ensure that the status quo remains so, as it favours them personally, rather than society as a whole.
Human Nature, granted, but i’d like to see a more even playing filed, personally. Let the aristocracy have to fight their way up same as everyone else. What’s wrong with that?
In a 100m sprint, all athletes start at exactly the same distance from the line. Those cheating are disqualified. No-one has any advantage over the others, other than individual ability.
I think those at the top fear that if the playing field were level, they would not be able to hold onto wealth and power in the way they do, so they manipulate the situation to suit their own ends. Obviously.
does not in any way make for the most just, exciting, progressive and rewarding society. Just prolongs the stagnation…
deviantFree MemberThats just it though Elfinsafety, the aristocracy did fight their way up….just not in your life time or mine….thats why it is called ‘old money’ and bitching about it hundreds of years later is rather sad dont you think?
Are you proposing a system with no inherited wealth, whereby everybody starts from zero?….what would happen to somebody’s wealth after they die in that scenario?….no opportunity or means to pass things on to offspring seems very mean.
Like i said earlier, where do you draw the line?….do you stop my parents from leaving me their house?
ElfinsafetyFree MemberThats just it though Elfinsafety, the aristocracy did fight their way up….
🙄
bitching about it hundreds of years later is rather sad dont you think?
Erm, no. I think just rolling over and accepting things without question, in spite of them not being fair, just or equal, just because thinking about them is too much effort, quite pathetic.
It’s our duty as members of a society to always challenge what we believe to be wrong. Otherwise, Humanity can never progress.
Britain is suffering because it’s stuck with an archaic old dinosaur of a system of social organisation. Other nations have successfully cast off the shackles of inherited power, and aren’t doing too bad, so why can’t we?
The dinosaurs died out cos they were unable to adapt and survive. We’re floundering in the mud, while other successfully mutated forms wait gleefully to feast on our rotting carcass…
JunkyardFree Memberthats why it is called ‘old money’ and bitching about it hundreds of years later is rather sad dont you think?
If I rob a country of all its wealth how long does it take before I can call this “old money” and call those I stole [ or their offspring] moaners?
Paassage of time does not magically right wrongs.Are you proposing a system with no inherited wealth,
are you moving the goal posts in a debate about the monarchy ?
miketuallyFree MemberAre you proposing a system with no inherited wealth
Inherited power and inherited wealth are two different things.
BermBanditFree MemberActually the inherited wealth thing is an interesting point. Clearly if the proponents of the status quo are right, there is absolutely no need for it obviously. The cream will obviously rise to the surface regardless, especially given all the advantages they will receive even without the inheritance.
The topic ‘What's the point of the royals?’ is closed to new replies.