Republican or Realist ?

[xane]

Last night I had to pick up my wife from Victoria Station, I drove there and got mildly annoyed at the diversions for the Queen Mum lying in state in Westminster Abbey, and being the secret "republican" I am, I silently cursed at this needless pomp and pageantry that caused me incovienience.

However, whilst I am theoretically opposed to the "rule by birthright" policy of the Head of State in this country, I cannot consider myself a republican (or whatever) because I am also a realist. Driving back I witnessed, at 11pm at night, a mile long queue of people wating to get into the Abbey to pay their last respects, some had probably been queuing for several hours, there were old and young present. I heard reports that over 200,000 have paid respects and some have queued for nine hours.

There is no doubt in my mind, and there never has been, that the Royal Family, and all it stands for, is very, very popular in this country. I personally don't agree with the idea of a monarchy, constitutional or not, but I cannot argue my case against it without giving a viable and realistic alternative. I can give all the reasoning I like, but there is an overriding prerogative - "if it ain't broke don't fix it".

Lets be honest, what can replace a monarchy ? Whilst I often have nice fluffy republican dreams about an elected Head of State, the terrifying vision of "President Thatcher" or "President Blair" turns it swiftly into a nightmare.

The royals, as part of a bicameral government, have actually brought stability and respect to this country for hundreds of years, and whilst there have been one or two "rotten apples", you only need to point to various maniac and dictatorial presidents in other governments around the world to show that's normal business. More importantly the royals have popular support, which is precisely what the Head of State is supposed to get.

I stongly doubt democratically elected Heads of State get the same level of appreciation as hereditary ones, in whatever country (maybe someone can share a view from one of them).

God Bless You Queen Mum, I didn't vote for you, but if could have I would have

 

[Wij]

ok, i agree

 

[Summo]

He's a persuasive young man, so he is.

I vote for Camazotz.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by SomeGuy
I vote for Camazotz.

Sod off, I prefer to rule by divine right, ooops what a giveaway !

 

[Wij]

I'm gonna rule by threats of doom once I've patented this death ray.

 

[mr.Blacky]

well instead of a monarch you could have a powerless president, but who would want to be that.... oh and no pay. Me I prefer monarchy with bounderies.

 

[xane]

follow up:

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_562502.html?menu=news.latestheadlines.uknews

 

[raw.]

errr dunno

 

[throdgrain]

Well said Camatoz

 

[suicide121]

I'm not sure really, I think the monarchy is holding us back a bit, but it's kept the country stable so changing it might not be a good idea

 

[mr.Blacky]

holding back how? with the economy, science.......

 

[Wij]

President Blair's ambitions

 

[Stazbumpa]

Very well put Mr Camazotz.


Personally I am a monarchist, but I want to see the pay roll scaled down so it doesn't include people who do fuck all or are only just related by being 9th cousins or something stupid like that.

The idea of a rebublic fills me with the same loathing as the phrase "Religious Law" and "Nuclear Fallout". Like you say, if it aint broke, dont fucking fix it. I dont believe for one second that the Monarchy has held Britain back in any way. Most of the best ideas seem to come from Britain, our economy is far better than many an other rebublic and there is no danger of that stopping.

 

[L_Plates]

The monarchy is somethng to be proud of and has been for hundreads of years. Yes ppl in other countries are proud of there presidents but they always change like in america every 4 years. We have had the same queen for the last 50 years and it makes me proud .. When i hear the national anthem and see the queen standing there looking at her Country showing respect i feel so proud to be part of the experience.

All in all ... God save the queen and may it continue for many more hundreds of years.

 

[*charlton_thd*]

national anthem needs to be changed, maybe it should be "smack my bitch up" remixed to be "smack my queen up" that'd be great when we march out during the olympics

 

[pocketyoda]

The royal family is part of Great Britain's heritage - I am not a royalist - but what is the alternative - an elected President that has none of the history of the royal family. Why do so many people visiting this Island visit the royal family establishmnets.

 

[Summo]

HRH The Queen™ appears with the kind permission of English Heritage.

 

[Hashmonster]

Originally posted by SomeGuy
HRH The Queen™ appears with the kind permission of English Heritage.

LOL!

well said camazotz, gah 3 attempts to spell your name

 

[Munkey-]

Well you all know my thoughts about communism. royal family would be better if we had more comedians like the queen's husband who aint a king for some stupid reason (philip?) "do you still throw spears at each other?" "this box looks like it was made by an indian"

ah such classics


roll on prince charles!

 

[mr.Blacky]

ahhh but you must admit sometimes you just gotta say unpolite things.

 

[throdgrain]

The Duke Of Edinbrugh's "rude" comments make me laugh, they are the same sort of thoughtless things that many people say. I like em.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by stazbumpa
Personally I am a monarchist, but I want to see the pay roll scaled down so it doesn't include people who do fuck all or are only just related by being 9th cousins or something stupid like that.

I think you'll find some years back the civil list (payroll) was actually reduced significantly to include only those who actually do have a chance of becoming monarch, i.e. not funding Helen "Melons" Windsor for dancing in nightclubs all the time. In return the Queen decided to fund them herself.

This was of course in return for no more government bitching about how the royals don't pay tax, until of course stupid Eddie and his even thicker wife decided to get jobs and not pay tax, bloody obvious exploit if you ask me.

Strangely the royal family is actually coming in line with its european models, after years of refusing change, and without making much of a fuss less a fanfare. Even more strange was the picture of the European Parliament standing to 2 minutes silence for the Queen Mum, bit of a contradiction to those claiming european unity would kill off the royals (despite other european countries actually having them).

The fact is on paper, republics are great and accountable, yet in practise they ooze of sleaze and politics, something a royal family can actually rise above.

 

[mr.Blacky]

well a unified europe (federation, one state or what i prefer a confederation) will for sure mean that the position of a monarch will alter. Most likely it will mean that they become more a gouverner then a president.

 

[pocketyoda]

A few remarks Prince Phillip has made.
Makes you proud to be Greek/German


1) After accepting a gift off a Kenyan native he replied "You are a
woman aren't you?"

2) After the Dunblane massacre : "If a cricketer decided to go into a school and batter people to death with his bat, are we going to ban cricket bats?"

3) "If it has four legs and is not a chair, has wings and is not an
aeroplane, or swims and is not a submarine the Cantonese will eat it"

4) Told a student from Brunai how sorry he was that the student had to fly to Glasgow.

5) On a World Wildlife Fund visit he refused to touch a Koala bear as "It will be riddled with ghastly diseases"

6) Welcomed former German chancellor Helmut Kohl as 'Reichskanzler' The title Hitler gave to himself and has never been used since.

7) Suggested locals were cannibals on a visit to Papua New Guinea by asking a British student "You managed not to get eaten then?"

8) Asked a wealthy Cayman Islander "You're all descended from pirates aren't you?"

9) Asked a Scottish driving instructor "How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough for them to pass"

10) Told a group of deaf school children at a fund raising event
standing next to a Jamaican steel drum band "Deaf? No wonder you are deaf standing so close to that racket"

11) On a visit to China he described Peking as "ghastly" and said that if you stay too long there you will become "slitty eyed"

12) Told a student in Budapest that "You can't have been in Budapest that long because you haven't got a pot-belly"

13) In India visiting a site where the British army in the years of the Empire had slaughtered Indian civillians, He was shown a plaque commemorating the 2000 killed to which he quipped "No, no, we didn't slaughter that many"

14) Told a mother who had recently lost two sons in a house fire that "smoke alarms are a damn nuisance"

15) On a visit to a large factory he told a group of workers that a
fuse box "looks like it has been put in by an Indian"

In 1996 he caused an outcry among gun law reformers when he said: "There's no evidence that people who use weapons for sport are any more dangerous than people who use golf clubs or tennis rackets or cricket bats."

The Prince angered local residents in Lockerbie when on a visit to
the town in 1993, he said to a man who lived in a road where 11 people had been killed by wreckage from the Pan Am jumbo jet: "People usually say that after a fire it is water damage that is the worst. We are still trying to dry out Windsor Castle."

He said of Canada: "We don't come here for our health. We can think of other ways of enjoying ourselves."


At the height of the recession in 1981 he said: "Everybody was saying we must have more leisure. Now they are complaining they are unemployed."

In 1966 he provoked outrage by saying: "British women can't cook."

Commenting on stress counselling for servicemen in a TV documentary on the 50th Anniversary of D-Day, he said: "It was part of the fortunes of war. We didn't have counsellors rushing around every time somebody let off a gun, asking `are you all right - are you sure you don't have a ghastly problem?'. You just got on with it."

Personal remarks have annoyed singing stars. In 1969 The Duke said to Tom Jones after the Royal Variety Performance: "What do you gargle with, pebbles?".

 

[suicide121]

Personal remarks have annoyed singing stars. In 1969 The Duke said to Tom Jones after the Royal Variety Performance: "What do you gargle with, pebbles?".
[/B]

 

[mr.Blacky]

In 1966 he provoked outrage by saying: "British women can't cook."

well a few can....

 

[xane]

2) After the Dunblane massacre : "If a cricketer decided to go into a school and batter people to death with his bat, are we going to ban cricket bats?"

I suppose he has a point, but then again cricket bats are actually used to play cricket, whereas large calibre handguns have no other purpose but to kill people.

4) Told a student from Brunai how sorry he was that the student had to fly to Glasgow.

I flown to Glasgow, I was sorry too.

6) Welcomed former German chancellor Helmut Kohl as 'Reichskanzler' The title Hitler gave to himself and has never been used since.

Appropriate for Herr Kohl, actually.

10) Told a group of deaf school children at a fund raising event
standing next to a Jamaican steel drum band "Deaf? No wonder you are deaf standing so close to that racket"

If I had too stand next to steel drums for as long as that guy has had too I'd be bloody sick of them too, in fact, I've only heard them once and I am sick of them.

Commenting on stress counselling for servicemen in a TV documentary on the 50th Anniversary of D-Day, he said: "It was part of the fortunes of war. We didn't have counsellors rushing around every time somebody let off a gun, asking `are you all right - are you sure you don't have a ghastly problem?'. You just got on with it."

Well, I actually think he has a point here

Personal remarks have annoyed singing stars. In 1969 The Duke said to Tom Jones after the Royal Variety Performance: "What do you gargle with, pebbles?".

So, the royals watch the Flintstones ?

 

[Testin da Cable]

heh

cama has my vote

 

[mr.Blacky]

Originally posted by camazotz
I suppose he has a point, but then again cricket bats are actually used to play cricket, whereas large calibre handguns have no other purpose but to kill people.

If I had too stand next to steel drums for as long as that guy has had too I'd be bloody sick of them too, in fact, I've only heard them once and I am sick of them.

You are forgetting the that they are also used to shoot fury little creatures, like cudly rabbits.

Try just walking past a big organ (dunno how to spel it).
Here I am just walking past one those things with my discman on (loud with loud music) and I couldn't here my freaking discman.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by Mr.Blackshirt
You are forgetting the that they are also used to shoot fury little creatures, like cudly rabbits.

Firstly, a 9mm/.357" (or higher) handgun would probably completely liquidate or vapourise a small animal like a rabbit, not good if you wish to eat it. Secondly, a vast amount of 9mm and higher handguns are notoriously inaccurate at a distance, even with the best marksmen, you would never get close enough to a rabbit to have a good shot without it bolting away.

The arguments against the kind of handguns covered in the ban are poor and pander to the "nanny government" rant. The fact is a 9mm or higher handgun (note NOT a rifle or shotgun or .22 handgun) is _not_ used for sport or hunting at all, only for killing people.

If you want to do sport/hunting you use either a small calibre weapon, like a .22, or a rifle. Although there _are_ large calibre handgun sports in America, the weapons used are a far cry of the kind of handgun you'd ever see over here.

P.S. WTF is with the vote thing ?