[Closed] The Smiths' Morrissey: 'Royals are benefit scroungers'

Junkyard - I mean the countries where revolution has overthrown a monarchy have all ended up with a ruling class that perpetuates it's own lineage by whatever methods available. Whether that be selective education, politics or whatever, you still end up with a 'ruling class' and the rest - just not with the history attached. What I'm saying is the end result is no better and often worse from the aspect of freedom and inequality.

Fred - you do take things personally, don't you? Bless.

Fred, not sure that was a personal attack.

Mol; I'd imagine it makes her quite crotchety, no?

She doesn't seem to care. However she wandered the flat today with a piece of bread which ended up crumbed and in everyone's bed, that made me crotchety 👿

[i]However she wandered the flat today with a piece of bread which ended up crumbed and in everyone's bed, that made me crotchety [/i]

Try and see it from her point of view ie. "Daddy's let me loose in the flat with some bread. Need to make the most of this"

Heh! Nice one! Was it buttery?

Mate of mine put a piece of chocolate in his baby's nappy, just after his missus had changed him. Dairy Milk I think. Then said to her 'I think he's had another poo love'. So, she takes the baby to change him again. Then exclaims that it's chocolate. My mate then asked her why she was tasting the baby's poo.

He ended up wearing the next genuinely filled one, on his face. 🙂

I mean the countries where revolution has overthrown a monarchy have all ended up with a ruling class that perpetuates it's own lineage by whatever methods available.

No, not buttery. Plain dry medium sliced brown bread, she loves it 😯

At a baby shower for one of my sisters in law, they had the usual stuff like nappy changing competitions and so on (on dolls, it's an American thing, don't ask). To make it more realistic they put chocolate spread in the nappies. Afterwards they tossed them in the bin. Well the dog finds them, pulls them out and starts licking up the chocolate. Twas a disgusting scene for those who didn't know the whole story 🙂

Junkyard - If you're going to ignore Bush you can also ignore Kennedy. Ok so only one pres but quite a few senators. There is still an upper class of 'old money' in the US.

The old class structure is gone

Really? Check out how William the Conquerer divvied up the spoils after he fought to be alpha male in this country and then check out who owns what now. You'll get a surprise.

So the USa now has two from 250 million how many could you name here from 55 million?
It is a pointless argument any society that has had aristocracy for the length of time we have had it will have an entrenched establishment /wealthy elite whatever.
in a republic /more egalitarian society some influential families/individuals will exist and develop over time but it is nothing compared to that which is entrenched here.
Look how many cabinet ministers were privately educated and inherited wealth compared to self made in US politics for example

We appear to be back to assuming that the Royals are a debatably expensive tourist attraction with no purpose. Nobody has yet answered my argument on pages 3-4 that they are a valuable and working part of the constitution and a safeguard against a democratically elected dictatorship.

Regarding the class system perpetuating the oppression of the working classes, anybody not starting from a position of wronged, chippy prejudice can see that Britain is a meritocratic society. For every rich toff I'll show you a self made man/woman. As somebody said, Kate Middleton's surely an example of social mobility in action? Do the endlessly wronged and oppressed lefties on here actually know any posh people? I do, and I can assure you they spend their time working and living their lives like the rest of us. Plotting the continued oppression of the workers doesn't figure that highly.

Get rid of the Royals and you will have a new ruling class to rail against, one with just as much inherited wealth and privelege but without the duty to and good work for UK plc. Tootall's point was that countries who have overthrown their old ruling classes have frequently got something as bad or worse, eg Russia, France initially, Germany. [u]Most[/u] of the world's monarchies these days are what we would consider free, happy places. [u]Most [/u]of the world's hellholes are The Peoples' Glorious Republic of Somewhere.
Someone's going to bang on about Saudi now, hence I said most!

TooTall -

Member

Fred agree? Not in his blood.

I beg to differ. He agreed with me, earlier. Can't get stronger evidence than that, given our usually opposed views on just about everything...

Not riding with ernie today then, Fred?

[i]Do the endlessly wronged and oppressed lefties on here actually know any posh people?[/i]

It's good to debate about these things but can we please stop the labelling, it really doesn't help and makes the poster seem like they have a chip on their shoulder rather than the "endlessly oppressed lefties".

I am a leftie and i don't feel oppressed nor do i feel endlessly wronged either. I don't support the Royal family per se but then neither do i feel strongly enough to want to get rid of them. I don't see them as a ruling class either.

As i have said before i see the ever increasing divide between the rich and the poor as the main issue in our society together with the "i'm alrght jack" attitude.

I'm not sure how meritocratic Britain is. To have a true meritocracy you would need to ensure that everybody had access to the same advantages in life primarily education and i don't think this is the case.

As for the Royal family being an important check on the govt. i really don't see that. I personally believe if the Queen (King) ever tried to exercise those powers they wouldn't be there very much longer. It is a formality that we keep in place because of tradition rather than any real political power.

As for the Royal family being an important check on the govt. i really don't see that

There aren't that many left in the House of Lords ie. about 700+ peers in the HoL of which hereditary account for only 92. Figures from 2009 -

1. Labour: 207 life peers, 4 hereditary peers
2. Conservative: 157 life peers, 47 hereditary peers
3. Lib Dems: 72 life peers, 5 hereditary peers
4. Cross-bench: 169 life peers, 33 hereditary peers
5. Church of England: 26 archbishops and bishops
6. Law Lords: 12
7. Other: 10 life peers, 2 hereditary peers

Labelling is a handy device for those who enjoy simple answers to complex questions.

"Meritocracy", for instance. It was mentioned earlier that this is apparently a "Leftie" preference.

I support the idea of a meritocratic Republic, but my own preference is for a politically Liberal Democracy that is economically, largely based on free-market capitalism, so what label am I supposed to wear, then?

Really? Check out how William the Conquerer divvied up the spoils after he fought to be alpha male in this country and then check out who owns what now. You'll get a surprise

I won't, because I already know. A lot of land is indeed owned by nobles, but a lot isn't.

There are no divisions by CLASS any more. There are however very many divisions by WEALTH. Some upper class people are also wealthy, this is not a coincidence, but it is historical.

Look how many cabinet ministers were privately educated and inherited wealth

Again that's wealth not class. Big difference. In fact, all the difference when it comes to this argument. The fact that you can become leader of the country from a working or middle class background however many generations back is pretty significant don't you think?

[i]so what label am I supposed to wear, then? [/i]

difficult 😉

Edit - although i'm not labelling you or anything ...

I agree with molgrips. I think the illusion of "class rule" is maintained by the Windsors to provide 1: a device with which to protect their own wealth and 2: provide a totem around which the (increasingly diffuse) tribe can gather.

We really DO need to progress beyond this arrangement.

mancjon - Member

so what label am I supposed to wear, then?

difficult

Edit - although i'm not labelling you or anything ...

😆

I might accept "Awkward Squad"... 😉

There are no divisions by CLASS any more. There are however very many divisions by WEALTH. Some upper class people are also wealthy, this is not a coincidence, but it is historical.

Dunno about that Molgrips

[img] [/img]

Only takes one look at this pair, her with her scowly face and him with his OBE on the wrong side, to show that you can be wealthy, and you can be 'posh', you can mingle with the right crowd, and get invited to all the right places - but theres certainly always going to be a significant division of [b]Class[/b] that all the money and status in the world really can just never make up for 🙂

Not riding with ernie today then, Fred?

No, because I'm a wronged, oppressed lefty and there's only so much oppression a lad can take. 🙁

There are no divisions by CLASS any more.

That's an interesting statement. By that I spose you mean there are no apparent barriers to 'success' for anyone. Theoretically true, I'll give you that, but there are still plenty of glass ceilings. The Old Boy's Network is still very much alive. Whatever the Paranoid Righties say.

And I agree that we need to find a workable alternative before we get the guillotines out, but there are signs that the Status Quo is crumbling, and things are changing. That we've had far more public discussion and debate surrounding the validity of the Monarchy these last couple of weeks, compared to 30 years ago, that's for sure.

One interesting thing I noticed on Friday; travelling through bits of London that were alternatively deprived, wealthy, left wing, conservative, it was surprising just how little apparent support there was for the Royals. Hardly any flags, bunting, etc. I counted less than a dozen homes with anything that displayed Royal support. Not saying there wasn't any, but there just wasn't the fervour that went with Charles and Di. As though people can't be bothered any more. And although the telly screamed about street parties etc, the ones they showed all seemed pretty stage-managed affairs, not the spontaneous community efforts we saw in 1981.

Now I'm not one for 'off with their heads', as the royals are just people like everyone else. I just don't really see why they should have so much privilege without earning it.

'Divine right To Rule'.

Discuss.

There are no divisions by CLASS any more. There are however very many divisions by WEALTH. Some upper class people are also wealthy, this is not a coincidence, but it is historical.

Elf

Interesting point about the street parties, got me thinking.

Rather than a sign of less support for the Royals it could also be seen as a sign of a more divided community where people are only really interested in themselves and not the greater whole if you see what i mean.

PS please dont try and answer I cant be arsed and fear it will be as painful as you telling me why you are a socialist who believes in the free marke

Jesus. Who pissed in your coffee this morning?

My point was fairly simple, sorry if you can't follow. I won't expand because you said not to 🙂 However afaik there are lots of relatively poor class people, however I cannot (obviously) provide a list.

[i]PS please dont try and answer I cant be arsed and fear it will be as painful as you telling me why you are a socialist who believes in the free market.[/i]

But we all have to work with the free-market unless you mean something different from what i understand ie. capitalism. Socialism in terms of controlling the means of production doesn't work very well.

If Socialism means just that then i'm not one. What i want is capitalism with a social conscience and this requires a certain amount of state intervention.

Rather than a sign of less support for the Royals it could also be seen as a sign of a more divided community where people are only really interested in themselves and not the greater whole if you see what i mean.

Good point. But then surely the monarchy's role is to unite it's subjects under one common belief in their nation, no?

That doesn't seem to have worked at all really. In fact I'd suggest that such an ostentatious display of wealth, at a time of increasing austerity amongst the 'commoners', will only serve to arouse even stronger anti-monarchic feelings amongst the populace.

What i want is capitalism with a social conscience

Here you go:

[img] [/img]

What i want is capitalism with a social conscience

Try this:

[img] [/img]

Interesting point about the street parties, got me thinking.

Rather than a sign of less support for the Royals it could also be seen as a sign of a more divided community where people are only really interested in themselves and not the greater whole if you see what i mean.

Or it could indicate that royalists in the London area, due to their proximity, were more likely to have gone into the Centre of London to celebrate, rather than stay at home and put up bunting?

Regards lack of spontaneity - well, that was pretty much banned in the name of enfinsafety wasn't it, since people had to apply to the council beforehand, then by their very nature, they were less spontaneous and more staged!

[i]In fact I'd suggest that such an ostentatious display of wealth, at a time of increasing austerity amongst the 'commoners', will only serve to arouse even stronger anti-monarchic feelings amongst the populace.
[/i]

Totally agree. But i'm not sure the Royals are the cause of this, rather a "victim" (in the loosest sense of the word). I guess i'm just worried that it's all a bit of a sideshow and we lose perspective on the real issues in this country.

Molgrips

Yes, i wouldn't mind if i wasn't too old to emigrate to be honest. I don't personally see things getting much better in this country now we have a govt. that seems determined to do to the public sector what Maggie did to the private sector.

I really don't like to think what type of society we will be when this govt. has finished it's job.

No need to worry Mancjon. They'll mess up public services so badly that everyone will suddenly rediscover a left leaning tendency left dormant since 1979 and change the govt at the end of this term.

Hope so. The argument is often that labour spend, spend, spend and then the Conservative come in and sort it all out.

I prefer to look at this way. The Tories try to turn into a mean spirited, self interested nation and then Labour get in and try to remind us that there is more to life than simply looking after yourself.

True although Labour didn't do quite so well this time around on that front. Naturally I blame Maggie 🙂

Health Care and Education both improved significantly under Labour from 1997-2010. As well as many other things.

Tories woon't have managed the economy any better. Education and Health Care wooduv continued to worsen.

I also blame Maggie for anything that goes wrong.

Tick tock, tick tock....

Well, when all else fails, it's a pretty safe bet to blame Maggie, chances are she did something to make it worse 🙂

So next time I'm hoping for an AV vote that brings in a coalition of Labour, Lib Dem and green.

Hmmm, not so sure about Lib Dems any more. I had some sympathy with their position after the election and also their argument for forming a coalition with the Tories.

But they have been duped IMO. This is a conservative govt with a conservative agenda and the Lib Dems have had very little input into what is actually happening. Each day that goes by they look more and more uncomfortable and out of place.

Limp Dems = Tories with even less balls.

I feel that the Lib Dems are still good folk but they've been put in a no-win situation by circumstances and the Tories, which is a shame.

Lib Dems have sold out and swapped principled politics for a self indulgent moment in power.

in a republic /more egalitarian society some influential families/individuals will exist and develop over time but it is nothing compared to that which is entrenched here.

Of course it isn't. They need a few more years to catch up. Parents look after their kids and no matter how great great great grandpappy got money and power, they will ensure the perpetuation of the family line.

[url] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/11/AR2009091101831.html [/url]

[url] http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2000/0227elections_hess.aspx [/url]

Lib Dems have sold out and swapped principled politics for a self indulgent moment in power.

Principled politics are useless if you aren't at the table.