So apart from making a few speeches what has he actually done?
His Aston db6 runs on E85? Big woop.
You suggested that people who support the monarchy “Sends shivers down your spine.
Shivers down your spine? Whatever your personal opinions of the monarchy people who support it aren’t weirdos, they are just very normal average people, the majority of the population in fact.
As I said, get a grip.
Again, biggest so what ever. A load of people used to love Savile and Rolf Harris. They got rightly put in the trash and so should Charlie and his grubby mob.
Having a load of dumb ignorant folk waving flags and clapping like demented seals means nothing. Like I said, a majority voted for Boris. That's is a big red flag for the intelligence of the 'majority. Something you ignored on my last post. Strange that.
And you don't know its 'the majority of the population' at all, more barrel scraping from someone who is weirdly desperate to defend people who cheer a family who try and protect criminals and one of them is very likely a serial abuser. Very very odd behaviour.
You've got to have something fundamentally wrong with you, if despite everything they've done you choose to support them. He tried to use his influence as a Royal to get a paedophile priest off the hook. So yes they are weirdos as you put it. Stupid pig thick ignorant ones.
The royals are an absolute blight on the UK for the way in which they entrench the class system.
You could abolish the royal family tomorrow (and I would), but it wouldn't even change the class system. There's only 2 aristocrats in the top 40 richest people in the UK (admittedly these lists are always ropey, and it omits the monarch).
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/sunday-times-rich-list
Like I said, a majority voted for Boris.
No, they didn't.
And you don’t know its ‘the majority of the population’ at all
Yes, you do.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/institution/The_British_Monarchy?content=trackers
They are a horrible lot.
Edward VIII should of been the end of them and nearly was.
He also should of been tried for treason for his antics during the war.
Despite this, good old Lizzie called him her favourite Uncle.
QEII played the role as she did because of how close they came to getting dumped.
Yet she still gave millions of pounds to cover her nonce of a son and then put him front and centre at the 1st big event after he had told to step away from Royal duties.
Now we have "Queen Camilla" despite being told that wouldn't happen, not that I really care but hopefully some of their "base" will get pissed off about it.
Vive La Republique!
You could abolish the royal family tomorrow (and I would), but it wouldn’t even change the class system
Exactly this. Whether you keep, reform or abolish the monarchy it won't make a blind bit of difference to the actual lives of ordinary people. It might make you feel better, you might think that you are sticking it to the man, but the people who properly pull the strings and who properly get away with the greatest tax scams and exploit the system and negatively impact our lives will sit chuckling away that their dead cat wearing a crown has caught you all out.
Don't let your hate blind you to reality
Having a load of dumb ignorant folk waving flags and clapping like demented seals means nothing. Like I said, a majority voted for Boris. That’s is a big red flag for the intelligence of the ‘majority. Something you ignored on my last post. Strange that.
And yet, you think the royals enforce the class system? Think you need to look in the mirror mate. You're most certainly not part of the solution that's for sure.
Having a load of dumb ignorant folk
That’s is a big red flag for the intelligence of the ‘majority
Very very odd behaviour.
Stupid pig thick ignorant ones.
All that just in the one post. Lovely.
I bet the tourists are queuing up.
They're just doing a phone in on Five Live. Its quite an eye-opener. Theres some mad old bat on there saying she'll be camping on the Mall for 4 nights before the coronation to make sure she's got her prime spec. Another one saying that she's in the Guiness Book of Records for having the largest collection of royal memorabilia.
You know that on the day there will be thousands of people like them that generally invoke that slight embarrassment at being English that you get when you see the crowds at Wimbledon on Henman Hill/Murrys mound/Whatever its called next year. A sort of badly dressed, terrifyingly passive aggressive middle-classness. Their union flags being the only thing they own that isn't beige.
I find it all absolutely baffling. I watched the outpouring of cap-doffing when Lizzie shuffled off in complete bemusement. At the end of the day though they're all harmless enough and if it stops them, however briefly, from deluging social media with complaints about wheely bin collections and writing to local papers about antisocial behaviour, then surely we all win?
And yet, you think the royals enforce the class system?
Deference innit?
Certainly does enforce and promote the idea of a class born to rule, rather than a meritocracy.
I find it all absolutely baffling
Me too Binners. A riding buddy of mine told me he’d driven back early from a holiday in France to queue up to see queenie’s coffin. There was a tear in his eye! I was indeed baffled!
Mleh, choosing a Head of State is always a crap shoot whichever way you do it, It may as well be the Windsors (it is, after all, the only thing they have experience in)
If a windsor is the best candidate why can’t we elect them? Why do their siblings and offspring all automatically get “roles” too?
so Charles doesn’t offend me, in fact like Bunnyhop, I think he’s probably got a lot of views I like. BUT the system offends me. The “tourism” argument is weak, and if it is true the U.K. tourist industry needs to seriously up its game as if people aren’t coming for your attraction and you just benefit by chance you don’t really deserve success. The can’t trust the public argument is stupid - yes you might get Boris as president but you can boot him out after 5 yrs. actually half the issue with U.K. politics is people don’t know who/what they are voting for - perhaps separating the figure head from the politics would help with that.
I was in Canada when the Queen died and on hearing my accent a couple of people asked me if I was OK, or whether I was upset!
Also met a Canadian woman in YVR flying to the UK to attend the funeral, she was telling me what a nightmare it was to book a hotel, and so on.
Mind you, I've seen the look in folks eyes when I tell them I enjoy MTB in the depths of winter mud wind and rain, so there is that.
Also met a Canadian woman in YVR
British Columbia is a strange place regarding the Royals.
I spent a few weeks there in 1994.
Never in my life had I seen so many portraits of the Queen. Way more than in the UK.
Exactly this. Whether you keep, reform or abolish the monarchy it won’t make a blind bit of difference to the actual lives of ordinary people. It might make you feel better, you might think that you are sticking it to the man, but the people who properly pull the strings and who properly get away with the greatest tax scams and exploit the system and negatively impact our lives will sit chuckling away that their dead cat wearing a crown has caught you all out.
Don’t let your hate blind you to reality
I didn't say that at all, and what you're saying is complete toss. Abolishing and expropriating the royals would return billions of assets to the state, and save millions in unncessary expenditure. That's money that could be spent on teachers, social workers and pensions thay would improve the actual lives of ordinary people. None of the assets the royals have appropriated or the money they take every year improves the actual lives of ordinary people - and it's precisely because of that it should be reduced to zero.
Equally, the idea that republicanism is a false flag operation by moustache-twirling plutocrats to divert attention from capitalist inequality is just stupid.
I just said the class system in this country is much more than the Royal Family (sex offenders or otherwise).
I find it all absolutely baffling. I watched the outpouring of cap-doffing when Lizzie shuffled off in complete bemusement.
two friends of my wife have barely spoken since, on hearing that one of them was about to go and queue up to see the the coffin in Edinburgh, the other one laughed because she thought it was a wind up. Like religion, and even a lot of politics it’s ingrained culture that we get from those around us and it’s difficult to see how stupid it is if you are wrapped up in it.
The bit that I really don’t like about the monarchy is the huge amount power they still have. I fully accept that they rarely use even a tiny part of the power they have but why do they even still have it?
The monarch still has the power to
sack the government and rule directly. This is what the PM has to go and see the monarch to be allowed to set up a government. The monarch can say no
Royal Assent of all legislation because without the monarch signature then it isn’t law. There is nothing saying they have to sign it
Have legislation changed to suit themselves. It is well documented that the monarch has legislation changed to suit themselves. One of the more recent examples what QE2 no Charles having legislation on the right for leaseholders to buy the freehold. The monarch had the law changed to except the Dutchies from this to protect thier financial interests
Deference innit?
Certainly does enforce and promote the idea of a class born to rule, rather than a meritocracy.
The USA doesn't have a monarchy but an absolutely thriving class system. In a lot of ways worse than ours.
A lot of new money adding to that divide as well. Meritocracy doesn't negate ego and cruelty.
Abolishing and expropriating the royals would return billions of assets to the state, and save millions in unncessary expenditure
The State already owns the majority of tne assets, which is why we have to pay for tne upkeep. If we sell it off, I'm not sure we'd like tne kind of folk who could afford to buy it either.
That’s money that could be spent on teachers, social workers and pensions thay would improve the actual lives of ordinary people
It's a tiny amount per person. And once you've disposed of an asset, it's a one off amount,not a never ending source of funds
None of the assets the royals have appropriated or the money they take every year improves the actual lives of ordinary people –
They employ quite a few folk directly, often in rural areas. The Princes Trust, that relies on his position to attract funding and support, helps hundreds of folk a year. The DofE scheme, again relying on the position for support and funding, gives thousands of kids a chance to develop skills and support local volunteering activities. Charities up and down the country benefit from "royal patronage" to get support for their work.
Equally, the idea that republicanism is a false flag operation by moustache-twirling plutocrats to divert attention from capitalist inequality is just stupid.
Which isn't what i said either, I said it was a dead cat. Other folk grab assets and exploit their position. There are are far bigger tax losses through exploiting loopholes than tne Royals. Other people have defended abusers in the church. Prince Andrew wasn't the only person at Epsteins parties. Doing away with royals addresses none of tne underlying causes, its fiddling with symptoms.
The whole thing needs reform, but removing the royals altogether may have unintended consequences, which the haters seem not to recognise.
The USA doesn’t have a monarchy but an absolutely thriving class system. In a lot of ways worse than ours.
A lot of new money adding to that divide as well. Meritocracy doesn’t negate ego and cruelty.
I've worked with various local landowners in my housing days. The landed gentry, on the whole, had a better understanding of their responsibilities to their tenants, communities and environment than most of the newly rich wannabe "Lords of the manors", even if it may have been due to self interest.
They employ quite a few folk directly, often in rural areas. The Princes Trust, that relies on his position to attract funding and support, helps hundreds of folk a year. The DofE scheme, again relying on the position for support and funding, gives thousands of kids a chance to develop skills and support local volunteering activities. Charities up and down the country benefit from “royal patronage” to get support for their work.
Those jobs and those charities won't disappear if we got rid of the Royals. Maybe a change of name but the mechanisms and organisations would still exist.
Would the 200+ lifeboat stations cease to exist if the RNLI dropped the R from their name?
Always fascinates me when the Royal Corps of Royal Defenders immediately point out the problems in America, as if it is the only alternative solution.
I'm writing this from Scotland, and I'm going to suggest we should look to Ireland for inspiration - given the imposition of a corrupt Westminster upon us here, and a Royal Family that rewrites Holyrood laws for its own benefit, I can only look at Ireland with a sense of wonder. They have a proud tradition of presidents, they have remained in Europe because forelock tugging nostalgia is less of an issue...
Give me Michael D Higgins and his dogs any of the week.
Or the German system. Or, or, or.
Also, at the risk of totally derailing the thread: Team Meghan all the way 😉 You can have your Wills and Kate and make beige paint with them...
I simply pointed out that removing the royal family will do nothing to the class system. Plenty of countries without a royal family have corruption and thriving class systems.
I fully respect individuals beliefs when it comes to cost, etc. I can see the points in those arguments. But when it strays into the class system, that's disingenuous at best.
And those posters know it.
That’s money that could be spent on teachers, social workers and pensions
It's not either or, we can do both those things.
Meh - corruption and class. Of course they are found everywhere - sadly inevitable. But I find it nigh on impossible to believe that removing the royals wouldn't spark a far reaching conversation about class, privilege, proprietariness, and the need for a modern system of government for a modern world.
The royals embody the scleroticism of British Government and society. The good chap principle of govt - FFS! FPTP - FFS! That these things work so well for vested interests is reason enough to blow them up and try something different.
I mean, what I hear from Royal Defenders is: This is as good as it's going to get. THat might not be their intent, but it's what I hear, and that is profoundly depressing.
I simply pointed out that removing the royal family will do nothing to the class system. Plenty of countries without a royal family have corruption and thriving class systems.
Yup, abolition of the monarchy is often used as a sop to placate the people. For example the fascist right-wing military dictatorship which ruled Greece from 1967-74 banned elections but held a referendum on the abolition of the monarchy, despite already having abolished it.
Abolition of the monarchy means very little in itself. Although this does not mean that the monarchy has any role to play in an advanced democracy, it clearly hasn't imo.
Has anyone stopped to think about the long-term impact of abolishing the monarchy on the commemorative ceramics industry?
Be careful what you wish for
Me too Binners.
And me.
I quite liked the Queen. She seemed nice, was a bit of a petrolhead, carried on working until she dropped and was broadly inoffensive. We've had worse figureheads. When she died it was sad, not for cap-doffing reasons but because a family had lost a mother and grandmother. You can be anti-royal without being a sociopath.
But queuing up for hours on end to see a wooden box? That's just bloody weird. Unless you're a dyed-in-the-wool forelock-tugger then the only justification I can see is to be able to say "I was there" and, well, it's hardly Live Aid.
Abolishing and expropriating the royals would return billions of assets to the state, and save millions in unncessary expenditure.
They sound like big numbers, but in national budgetary terms what you've got there is a massive house that's kinda falling down a bit and some pocket change.
The bit that I really don’t like about the monarchy is the huge amount power they still have. I fully accept that they rarely use even a tiny part of the power they have but why do they even still have it?
Given the present Parliamentary incumbents, I wish they exercised their power more.
The bit that I really don’t like about the monarchy is the huge amount power they still have. I fully accept that they rarely use even a tiny part of the power they have but why do they even still have it?
Given the present Parliamentary incumbents, I wish they exercised their power more.
That’s another multi page thread on its own.
I do think getting rid of the monarchy would be far reaching because in my mind all the silly titles dished out go as do all the Lords and a new second chamber set up.
Indeed. The idea of an elected head of state seems like a great idea for about half a millisecond, before you look at the recent voting-record of the British public. President Boris anyone?
The only hope would be if there were enough people who could orchestrate a campaign to elect Count Binface as our head of state, just for a laugh
But I find it nigh on impossible to believe that removing the royals wouldn’t spark a far reaching conversation about class, privilege, proprietariness, and the need for a modern system of government for a modern world.
Having a load of dumb ignorant folk
That’s is a big red flag for the intelligence of the ‘majority
Very very odd behaviour.
Stupid pig thick ignorant ones.
Could you square that circle for me?
relapsed_mandalorian
Full Member
Deference innit?
Certainly does enforce and promote the idea of a class born to rule, rather than a meritocracy.The USA doesn’t have a monarchy but an absolutely thriving class system. In a lot of ways worse than ours.
A lot of new money adding to that divide as well. Meritocracy doesn’t negate ego and cruelty.
Your answer has nothing to do with my statement.
Deference toward inherited power is unhelpful and undemocratic.
The less of it we have, the better.
The fact we have a Royal Family legitimises deference as a default position in our society.
To think otherwise is disingenuous at best.
Is it just deference to inherited power you have an issue with?
Me personally, I have an issue with deference to any power, inherited or earned via a meritocracy.
Deference to 'earned' power is one of the reasons this country is a bit of a shitshow, I'd argue more than inherited.
So I'm not sure who's being disingenuous here.
relapsed_mandalorian
Full Member
Is it just deference to inherited power you have an issue with?
No, of course not.
All abuse of power is abhorrent, be it domestic violence or institutionalised prejudice.
It does appear to be a part of human nature. Surely any attempt to minimise it is a positive step?
Removal of the RF would appear to be such a step forward.
I mean, what I hear from Royal Defenders is: This is as good as it’s going to get. THat might not be their intent, but it’s what I hear, and that is profoundly depressing.
You hear what you want to hear. I'm all in favour of them being reduced in numbers and cost, abolish them if that's what the public want, but my opinion - which is worth **** all, obviously, as are everyone else's- is that it won't solve any of the issues the Republicans seem to think it will. They so rarely -if ever - use their supposed powers to overrule the government it won't change anything there, it will create a vacuum to be filled by some chancer.
So less "it's as good as it gets" and more "better the devil you know".
Plenty of countries have done fine without a monarchy, we might do as well.
And edited to add - what other more important stuff will not happen while we all focus on abolishing the monarchy. Took hours of Parliamentary time to try and stop fox hunting
Removal of the RF would appear to be such a step forward.
It would, but I'm not convinced the impact would be as significant as you would hope. I would much rather turn my effort and energy to sorting out the shitshow that is how we are governed currently. The absence of any true accountability for our 'leaders' is comical.
If that was a little more effective and efficient then the impact on other connected institutions would play out and time would very clearly show if they're fit for purpose alongside a refreshed way of being governed. My gut tells me quite a few institutions would fold as a result, or at least reform to suit.
The Royals get a significant amount of money from the public purse, I understand that annoys people and I fully respect that POV, but like or not we see where that money goes, in some areas the taxpayer can benefit from it (I absolutely accept that if the royal estate was more open after abolishment, more of it could be enjoyed). Now let's have a convo about PPE contracts...
Which is the bigger 'waste' of taxpayer money? Where are there repetitions of waste, cronyism, and corruption?
I'm sure there's many in Westminster who like the Monarchy/Republic argument, keeps a portion of the population away from be interested in what ****ery they're up to.
It would, but I’m not convinced the impact would be as significant as you would hope.
It would be a step in the right direction, no?
It would send a very powerful message to those who believe they can continue to abuse their power without consequence.
It would send a very powerful message to those who believe they can continue to abuse their power without consequence.
No, I don't think it would in the slightest. Having Tony Blair and senior members of the Labour government that facilitated an illegal war on trial would probably have been more effective. Likewise with these dodgy PPE contracts. I mean I'm less bothered about them going to mates, more bothered the fact that many simply failed to deliver anything at all.
I honestly don't think binning off the Monarchy sends a message to anyone in Westminster. Accountability is fully absent, aided by a complicit media and a population who will ride or die for their corner no matter what.
Has anyone stopped to think about the long-term impact of abolishing the monarchy on the commemorative ceramics industry?
Be careful what you wish for
My Grandmother would be beside herself if there were a lack of porcelain collectable like this. Think of the pensioners!
No, I don’t think it would in the slightest.
Then we shall have to agree to disagree!
They sound like big numbers
I have two responses:
1) The annual budget is not massive. The assets are. And in any case I tend to believe that any million quid that is spent on social workers or pensions or even anti-tank weapons for Ukraine instead of on royals is a good thing.
2) Please send me £100 a year. It sounds like a big number, but you wouldn't even notice it over the course of a year, it's pocket change, not worth worrying about, so you should just do it.
My Grandmother would be beside herself if there were a lack of porcelain collectable like this. Think of the pensioners!
Without meaning to be rude about anyone's grandparents, that right there is a good reason for upper age limits as well as lower limits...
For example, Brexit wouldn't have happened without old biffers who are no longer in the workforce. And Scottish Indy would be a slam dunk, but for the folks over 60.
Experience is great and all, but...
Yes, but without royal memorabilia to purchase the elder generation could become dangerously radicalised...
I struggle with all this talk of deference. I was brought up in a pro monarchy, Forces household and went all through Cubs and Scouts promising to do my duty to the Queen.
To me, the Queen/royals are nothing more than symbols of the country, as opposed to the ever changing series of politicians or whoever.
I feel no deference to them. They are just people, as lucky/unlucky/****ed up as I am.
