|
|
Post by kingdaz on Mar 8, 2021 13:31:10 GMT
Maybe we should gillettine the virtue sibling left haha đź‘Ť
|
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Mar 8, 2021 13:54:36 GMT
Get rid. Can't see it happening anytime soon though sadly.
Maybe open up Buck Palace as a Wetherspoon.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 8, 2021 14:39:11 GMT
Since you brought it up...if only you'd applied the same degree of analysis to Brexit...  But I think I've seen it all now...a Brexiteer arguing that we should keep an unelected, unrepresentative establishment which we can't vote to remove on the grounds that it doesn't cost us very much per capita and is good overall for the economy of the country. That's perfect!  I was and still am a very strong brexiteer so it confuses me to see the support for the monarchy amongst my former bedfellows. They are contradictory stances in my eyes. If your interest is in lowering the height of the power pyramid so that the summit is closer to the masses at ground level, then how can you ever be in favour of having a monarchy at the top? It baffles me. It's a case of what the people want. The people want a royal family, and the people don't want to be ruled by Brussels. There are of course those like Blair who think they know better than the people, who should accept what they are given. The EU is based on that principle. The monarchy will go when people don't want it any more. The royals still have privilege but they lost power a long time ago. They even lost influence a long time ago. For that privilege they are expected to lead a life of public service. In terms of the power pyramid there is a theory that a UK PM with a majority has more power to govern than US President. A PM is only constrained by the Judiciary, but can overrule the Lords by creating more Lords and the monarch has to do what the government directs. A President is also constrained by the Judiciary but also has to contend with two houses in Congress to get his way. May be we should have a referendum on whether or not to keep the monarchy. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 8, 2021 14:49:15 GMT
Abolishing the Monarchy would mean yet more elections - for a president! So, for that reason I am against it. I rather like the idea of a Head of State who: a) most of the world's leaders REALLY want to meet and b) who does not spend their time in direct competition to the Prime Minister and c) who probably pays their own way in terms of the amount of foreign tourist income they and their family generate directly and indirectly. I'd much rather abolish the House of Lords and move to a democratically elected second chamber (elected by PR) than worry about the Monarchy. Do what some other countries do, elect a head of state who has no political power but elect them for 10 years or 20 Someone who 'everyone' likes who can smile and wave and pin medals on chests President Michael Palin With no hangers on Sorted Someone "who everyone likes" - good luck with that! Experience of this message board should have convinced you that finding someone who is liked by more than half the population is a pretty remote possibility! |
|
|
|
Post by mattyd2 on Mar 8, 2021 14:53:17 GMT
Do what some other countries do, elect a head of state who has no political power but elect them for 10 years or 20 Someone who 'everyone' likes who can smile and wave and pin medals on chests President Michael Palin With no hangers on Sorted Someone "who everyone likes" - good luck with that! Experience of this message board should have convinced you that finding someone who is liked by more than half the population is a pretty remote possibility! Most people like Stacey Dooley. If she was Queen I'd certainly buy more stamps and spend all day licking her. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 8, 2021 14:56:58 GMT
Someone "who everyone likes" - good luck with that! Experience of this message board should have convinced you that finding someone who is liked by more than half the population is a pretty remote possibility! Most people like Stacey Dooley. If she was Queen I'd certainly buy more stamps and spend all day licking her. I'd have no objection to Stacey Dooley - but half the country wouldn't vote for a red head (too much like Dave Kitson) and would want Piers Morgan instead! You see the problem we have?  Sir David Attenborough would be wanted by many - but would be regarded as a political choice by climate change deniers! |
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 8, 2021 15:01:35 GMT
Do what some other countries do, elect a head of state who has no political power but elect them for 10 years or 20 Someone who 'everyone' likes who can smile and wave and pin medals on chests President Michael Palin With no hangers on Sorted Someone "who everyone likes" - good luck with that! Experience of this message board should have convinced you that finding someone who is liked by more than half the population is a pretty remote possibility! Maybe David Attenborough? |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 8, 2021 15:03:04 GMT
Someone "who everyone likes" - good luck with that! Experience of this message board should have convinced you that finding someone who is liked by more than half the population is a pretty remote possibility! Maybe David Attenborough? Reviled by Climate change deniers and lovers of single use plastic - see my post above. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 8, 2021 15:08:04 GMT
Someone "who everyone likes" - good luck with that! Experience of this message board should have convinced you that finding someone who is liked by more than half the population is a pretty remote possibility! Maybe David Attenborough? Seems, like Palin mentioned above, fairly well liked by most, he sprang to mind for me too. Why not have half a dozen candidates (or whatever number really) and let people vote, if we absolutely *have* to have someone. Give them a one or two year renewable term, if people don't like them they can be dismissed at the end of it and someone else can have a go. Not everybody likes or wants the Royal family anyway, I can't see why any replacements have to be universally adored. |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 8, 2021 15:14:03 GMT
The monarchy has slowly evolved and slimmed down over the years. Too much of the good work they do has heads of charities and other organisations go unnoticed or not enough credit given.
As a ceremonial hereditary head of state with not much clout it would be no different to an elected head of state with no clout.
Unless we go down the route of a president with clout just adds layers of political bureaucracy which we don’t need. As said an elected 2nd chamber replacing the lords makes much more political and democratic sense
|
|
|
|
Post by mattyd2 on Mar 8, 2021 15:17:30 GMT
Maybe David Attenborough? Seems, like Palin mentioned above, fairly well liked by most, he sprang to mind for me too. Why not have half a dozen candidates (or whatever number really) and let people vote, if we absolutely *have* to have someone. Give them a one or two year renewable term, if people don't like them they can be dismissed at the end of it and someone else can have a go. Not everybody likes or wants the Royal family anyway, I can't see why any replacements have to be universally adored. Trevor MacDonald.. Most people like him, and would be seen as a progressive choice. Chris Tarrant. With Sally James as his consort. Felicity Kendall. Ant and Dec.. Paul O'Grady.. Again, progressive and would appease certain sectors, and he is a housewives favourite. Carol Smiley. Suzie off Countdown. Rachel Riley off Countdown. We are literally awash with nice people. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 8, 2021 15:22:20 GMT
Seems, like Palin mentioned above, fairly well liked by most, he sprang to mind for me too. Why not have half a dozen candidates (or whatever number really) and let people vote, if we absolutely *have* to have someone. Give them a one or two year renewable term, if people don't like them they can be dismissed at the end of it and someone else can have a go. Not everybody likes or wants the Royal family anyway, I can't see why any replacements have to be universally adored. Trevor MacDonald.. Most people like him, and would be seen as a progressive choice. Chris Tarrant. With Sally James as his consort. Felicity Kendall. Ant and Dec.. Paul O'Grady.. Again, progressive and would appease certain sectors, and he is a housewives favourite. Carol Smiley. Suzie off Countdown. Rachel Riley off Countdown. We are literally awash with nice people. Yup any of them would do me  Felicity Kendall was on the Graham Norton show recently, bought back some memories, still lookin great. |
|
|
|
Post by mattyd2 on Mar 8, 2021 15:24:35 GMT
Trevor MacDonald.. Most people like him, and would be seen as a progressive choice. Chris Tarrant. With Sally James as his consort. Felicity Kendall. Ant and Dec.. Paul O'Grady.. Again, progressive and would appease certain sectors, and he is a housewives favourite. Carol Smiley. Suzie off Countdown. Rachel Riley off Countdown. We are literally awash with nice people. Yup any of them would do me Felicity Kendall was on the Graham Norton show recently, bought back some memories, still lookin great. Just to clarify, who was looking great Felicity or Graham.? |
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Mar 8, 2021 15:26:39 GMT
I'm happy with them, long may they continue to reign.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Mar 8, 2021 15:39:27 GMT
Do you even need a head of state, other than the PM? Is there a specific constitutional reason why you can't just get rid of them and replace them with nothing? Depends if we ended up with some cunt like Trump trying to take complete control. I'm not a Royalist but i would rather them to be there as a safety net. A PM may run the country but they will always be a rung lower than the Royal Family and whilst the Royal Family are there then a future power grab seems almost impossible. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 8, 2021 15:48:49 GMT
Yup any of them would do me Felicity Kendall was on the Graham Norton show recently, bought back some memories, still lookin great. Just to clarify, who was looking great Felicity or Graham.? yeh, didn't word that brilliantly. Felicity, I used to love the Good Life back in the day. |
|
|
|
Post by FranktheRabbit on Mar 8, 2021 15:57:56 GMT
The queen is clearly a lizard who feasts on the flesh of innocent care home children. But she’s very old so Andrew uses his penis to tenderise them first for her. Brilliant. |
|
|
|
Post by mattyd2 on Mar 8, 2021 16:28:00 GMT
Just to clarify, who was looking great Felicity or Graham.? yeh, didn't word that brilliantly. Felicity, I used to love the Good Life back in the day. I hated the posh twat who lived next door, cuz it was dead obvious he was knobbing her. |
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 8, 2021 16:37:47 GMT
Do you even need a head of state, other than the PM? Is there a specific constitutional reason why you can't just get rid of them and replace them with nothing? What a day we are having. I am questioned about my support for monarchy when I am against UK membership of the EU. Conversely, you are a strong supporter of EU membership and question the need for a head of state, while the EU has 3 Presidents, all of them chosen by politicians, and none directly elected by the people of Europe.  There are no states to my knowledge have no head of state, but the nearest is Switzerland who rotate the ceremonial head of state between council leaders in turn. As Merkel has just ampley demonstrated, the Presidency of the European Council, which is rotated, could hardly be described as non political, ensuring an investment deal was hastily agreed with China before she ceased to be President, because that is what German business wanted. Switzerland have referenda on all major issues of government, sometimes many in a year. Most importantly the people voted not to join the EU, which I think the British people would have done (against my wishes then!) when Heath took the UK into the EEC with no mandate from the people. Because of the arguments, Wilson decided to settle the matter and let the people choose to stay in or leave in a referendum. We, including me, voted to stay in. No one has mentioned that after years of Franco, Spain chose to go back to a monarchy and have a non political head of state. I would hate to live in a country with a Thatcher, Johnson, Blair, Corbyn, etc. head of state. Nor would I want some TV celebrity, prominent sports person, rock star, eminent academic, captain of industry, prominent trade union leader, distinguished civil servant, etc. Give me the Queen. |
|
|
|
Post by Foster on Mar 8, 2021 16:52:20 GMT
Keep the Royals. You shouldn't give up on tradition if it doesn't do anyone any harm.
As long as they're performing their public duties I have no issue with them. I don't really get why people have such an issue with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by questionable on Mar 8, 2021 17:15:52 GMT
They generate billions in tourism revenue. And their outfits are cool. Well they haven’t done much for the past months, joking apart I’d say a king and a queen and the rest of the stuck up so and so’s can do one. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Mar 8, 2021 17:23:01 GMT
Do what some other countries do, elect a head of state who has no political power but elect them for 10 years or 20 Someone who 'everyone' likes who can smile and wave and pin medals on chests President Michael Palin With no hangers on Sorted Someone "who everyone likes" - good luck with that! Experience of this message board should have convinced you that finding someone who is liked by more than half the population is a pretty remote possibility! David Jason? |
|
|
|
Post by questionable on Mar 8, 2021 17:23:10 GMT
The monarchy has slowly evolved and slimmed down over the years. Too much of the good work they do has heads of charities and other organisations go unnoticed or not enough credit given. As a ceremonial hereditary head of state with not much clout it would be no different to an elected head of state with no clout. Unless we go down the route of a president with clout just adds layers of political bureaucracy which we don’t need. As said an elected 2nd chamber replacing the lords makes much more political and democratic sense Scholes has done wonders, don’t forget him. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 8, 2021 17:25:18 GMT
yeh, didn't word that brilliantly. Felicity, I used to love the Good Life back in the day. I hated the posh twat who lived next door, cuz it was dead obvious he was knobbing her. I think I'd convinced myself nobody was and she was just waiting for me to be old enough I probably wasn't alone.. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Mar 8, 2021 17:30:39 GMT
Keep the Royals. You shouldn't give up on tradition if it doesn't do anyone any harm. As long as they're performing their public duties I have no issue with them. I don't really get why people have such an issue with them. I think a lot of it’s envy. Let’s be honest who wouldn’t want to be in their position. Their lifestyle isn’t fair granted but life’s not fair. They are privileged through birth and inherited wealth but if they’re not hurting anyone I don’t get the hatred. Williams doing a lot of great work around mental health at the moment. The only one I have any major issue with is Andrew but you can’t tar them all with the same brush. It’s funny how some posters are bringing up the Queen allegedly doing a Nazi salute as a kid yet they’ll defend Begum to the hilt for joining Isis. |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 8, 2021 17:32:45 GMT
Keep the Royals. You shouldn't give up on tradition if it doesn't do anyone any harm. As long as they're performing their public duties I have no issue with them. I don't really get why people have such an issue with them. I think a lot of it’s envy. Let’s be honest who wouldn’t want to be in their position. Their lifestyle isn’t fair granted but life’s not fair. They are privileged through birth and inherited wealth but if they’re not hurting anyone I don’t get the hatred. Williams doing a lot of great work around mental health at the moment. The only one I have any major issue with is Andrew but you can’t tar them all with the same brush. It’s funny how some posters are bringing up the Queen allegedly doing a Nazi salute as a kid yet they’ll defend Begum to the hilt for joining Isis. Their lifestyle is awful, I wouldn't wish it on anyone..... |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Mar 8, 2021 17:33:43 GMT
I think a lot of it’s envy. Let’s be honest who wouldn’t want to be in their position. Their lifestyle isn’t fair granted but life’s not fair. They are privileged through birth and inherited wealth but if they’re not hurting anyone I don’t get the hatred. Williams doing a lot of great work around mental health at the moment. The only one I have any major issue with is Andrew but you can’t tar them all with the same brush. It’s funny how some posters are bringing up the Queen allegedly doing a Nazi salute as a kid yet they’ll defend Begum to the hilt for joining Isis. They're lifestyle is awful, I wouldn't wish it on anyone..... What’s so bad about it? |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 8, 2021 17:36:46 GMT
They're lifestyle is awful, I wouldn't wish it on anyone..... What’s so bad about it? The major members of the royal family lead a completely privileged but suffocating lifestyle, I wouldn't swap with them for any amount of money. The minor royals are just leeches, I'm not envious I would just rather my taxes went on important issues facing those marginalised in society....... |
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on Mar 8, 2021 17:39:39 GMT
If I hired a private army, went to war with the Windsor's, overthrew them and declared myself King, would the royalists be ok with that? Would they still see me as royalty? Would people still die for me?
I mean, that's pretty much how any royal family came to being, isn't it? It was super wealthy families who sent working class men to their deaths in order that they could be top dog and rule over the rest of us plebs.
|
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Mar 8, 2021 17:47:37 GMT
Nope. I've been screaming this since I was 16 mate. I don't consider myself a progressive, as such, but in a society that should be looking for real progress as it were, the Royals are fucking archaic. How is it, that when children in this very country are living on the poverty line, we continue to allow a single family to have extraordinary wealth due to their bloodline? Their children are born into immense privilege because why exactly? The Royals are a fucking relic of a time that we should be desperate to forget. And tourism? Lol. The old tourism argument.... as if no fucker would come to London because old Lizzy was booted out of her big house. London is one of the major capital cities in the world, one of the G8 capitals in fact and has a huge number of tourist attractions beyond the Royal family. The tourism argument is bollocks, it always has been. Fuck them off. I’ve never been a royalist as they are too elitist for me but regardless of my personal views they have been around from year dot and in the case of some of the previous kings and queens they’ve done far worse than what’s been alleged here. That said they’re a massive part of this country and like others that have been recently dismissed as “embarrassing” theirs been good and bad members (Andrew). I think if the Royal family were bombed out it would be a sad day. It just feels like this whole situation has been forced by one interview which everyone appears to be taking as gospel if they have a certain political view. I think we need to get the other sides perspective before we can truely make our mind up and let’s not forget what person in an interview isnt economical with the truth. I really don't care about this Harry / Markle bollocks either. The Royals have needed to go for fucking years. It's an embarrassment that we continue to fund their lavish lifestyle while many of us are just trying to get by financially. It's alright, they're good at shaking hands I suppose. |
|
