• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The British Monarchy.....

Andalublue said:
Where do you think half the satirical comedy that Brits enjoy so much would come from if we didn't see the irony in that? You know that the Queen's husband is generally referred to as Phil the Greek, don't you?

FYI, a minority of Brits do any 'revelling' in the Royals, it's just that most people can't think of an alternative system that would be better. A combined elected head of state and head of government doesn't work terribly well. An elected but ceremonial head of state seems a bit pointless - why elect someone to a position that holds only ceremonial function?

I hate the way the monarchy represents the fixed state of the British class system, but honestly, it's really a pretty low priority. Much higher up the priority list for me would be an electoral system that represented what the British people want; a supreme/constitutional court with democratic accountability; and a reverse of the London-oriented centralism that has been accelerating since the late-Seventies such that public investment in the capital outstrips investment in all other regions by a s*** load.

Priorities, people!
Click to expand...

But if it was only a minority that supported the royals then that institution would have vanished a long time ago. The fact is that the royal family is so deeply embedded in British culture that the thought of doing away with them would probably mean an implosion for the country.
 
They bring in money, bring a lot of focus to charities and many of them serve in the armed forces including combat zones.

No harm no foul.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
I think it could be good if someone better than Queen Elizabeth takes over. Queen Elizabeth is too stuck in her old ways to be any force of progressivism.
Click to expand...

I would be more concerned for the monarchies survival post Elizabeth II. In the meantime, she is not going anywhere, and the British people seem to like it that way. One only need to look how partisan politics plays a role in the top job for he USA and France to realize that perhaps the Brits should keep the status qua.
 
PoS said:
But if it was only a minority that supported the royals then that institution would have vanished a long time ago.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it was a minority supporting them, but that it was a minority 'revelling' in them. You don't have to 'revel' i.e. take extreme delight in them, in order to accept that we might as well keep them.

I suspect you'd find support for retaining the monarchy at about 70% levels in the UK. I think you'd find the percentage who regularly participate in royal activities, attend royal visits, line royal routes i.e. those who really 'revel' in them, at something below 10%.
 
Jetboogieman said:
~ I may see things differently with her successor if its Charles however.
Click to expand...


Sweden said:
~ King Charles the Foolish would be even worse.
Click to expand...

Princes Trust - 40 years of helping 825,000 disadvantaged young people start up in business. It used to be 15 to 25 but it went up to 30 years old; you can get cheap business premises, access to business grants, advice and equipment for two years.

Princes Trust Success Stories - people from poor backgrounds who would never have made it otherwise.

Prince Charles donates to Flood Hit Bostcastle 2004.

Prince Charles Donates to flood hit North West town 2005.

Prince Cyharles donates to Flood hit County 2014.

Prince Charles donates to flood hit North West County 2015.

Prince Charles donates to flood hit North East County 2015.

I agree he aint as popular as the Queen and what he did over Dianna has sealed his fate - however I wonder what ground people have against him otherwise?
 
Andalublue said:
There's nothing terribly unique about the Full English Breakfast, and frankly no one eats it daily, except perhaps those whose job is highly physical - farmers, miners, fishermen. It wouldn't be unusual for a full breakfast to total 2,000 calories. You don't eat that then sit behind a desk for 7 hours.

Every country within the UK has its own version. The Scots might add potato scones, perhaps their weird square sausage patties, who knows, even haggis. The Irish add white pudding and perhaps soda bread. The Welsh, cockles and laverbread. As a special treat no more than once a week, a Full ***** Breakfast is a beautiful thing. As a daily staple it's the way to wipe out a nation within the space of a generation.
Click to expand...

And for some reason, I've not come across another nation who has a sausage like ours :lol:
 
zyzygy said:
I don't know anyone who eats it on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

I mean most of my mates eat at least one every weekend. Especially when consider in most of the chain pubs its the only safe option.
 
gunner said:
And for some reason, I've not come across another nation who has a sausage like ours :lol:
Click to expand...

When I lived in America I used to crave a decent sauasge. :)
 
Higgins86 said:
I mean most of my mates eat at least one every weekend. Especially when consider in most of the chain pubs its the only safe option.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean. It's the full English every morning at home that has fallen out of favour.
 
zyzygy said:
I see what you mean. It's the full English every morning at home that has fallen out of favour.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it's fallen out of favour, in terms of desire; simply people are more health aware now.
 
gunner said:
I wouldn't say it's fallen out of favour, in terms of desire; simply people are more health aware now.
Click to expand...

The greasy spoon has become quite fashionable again with the hipsters. Bethnal green is full of hispsters and builders
 
Higgins86 said:
The greasy spoon has become quite fashionable again with the hipsters. Bethnal green is full of hispsters and builders
Click to expand...

I don't doubt it.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Princes Trust - 40 years of helping 825,000 disadvantaged young people start up in business. It used to be 15 to 25 but it went up to 30 years old; you can get cheap business premises, access to business grants, advice and equipment for two years.

Princes Trust Success Stories - people from poor backgrounds who would never have made it otherwise.

Prince Charles donates to Flood Hit Bostcastle 2004.

Prince Charles Donates to flood hit North West town 2005.

Prince Cyharles donates to Flood hit County 2014.

Prince Charles donates to flood hit North West County 2015.

Prince Charles donates to flood hit North East County 2015.

I agree he aint as popular as the Queen and what he did over Dianna has sealed his fate - however I wonder what ground people have against him otherwise?
Click to expand...
What he donates is a drop in the ocean to his personal wealth and the income from his inherited Dutch of Cornwall Estate. And that's before what the tax payer fronts for his travel and luxurious life style.

In terms of his threat to democracy, he has access to cabinet papers, which not even elected Junior Ministers do, and to comment on proposed legislation. Then you've got the "Black Spider Memos".
 
Jack of Devon said:
What he donates is a drop in the ocean to his personal wealth and the income from his inherited Dutch of Cornwall Estate. And that's before what the tax payer fronts for his travel and luxurious life style.
Click to expand...

I accept that - but he's being compared to the Queen. When he becomes King he will also bring in billions as she does now - but which other Royal has set up similar charities or donated as he does? That's the point being made.
Andrew's trade representative role was more to do with his getting to interesting golf courses, Anne does nothing and Edward? What does he do?. Margaret drank herself into an early grave and that's it for the ones of that generation.

Jack of Devon said:
In terms of his threat to democracy, he has access to cabinet papers, which not even elected Junior Ministers do, and to comment on proposed legislation. Then you've got the "Black Spider Memos".
Click to expand...

Same as the Queen. Trouble is when you examine it - there are a whole range of factors that have influence over our governance and laws that we don't have a say in or elect.
 
Peter King said:
I am sorry but your conspiracy theory nonsense is just that. Nonsense. Who cares that the Bilderberg Hotel was close to the location of the battle of Arnhem? It was perfectly suited for the purpose, conference rooms, good hotel accommodation and privacy.

Lindemans was a traitor and got his just reward for his treason after the war ended when they were preparing to try him but he saved the Dutch government loads of time and money by killing himself.

Still does not say anything about the choice of Bernhard (and others) of the Bilderberg hotel or the Bilderberg conferences themselves. And it most certainly is not evidence of Philip and Charles being traitors.
Click to expand...

Actually it is. I notice you ignored the post of mine that actually presents evidence to which your claim cannot stand up to; and blatantly points out the fact that you are defending a NAZI.

Abbazorkzog said:
Dutch Prince Bernhard was member of Nazi party

Monarchie - PERsonen A-Z: Prinz Bernhard

Translation: Bernhard studied law in Munich, Lausanne and Berlin. In 1935 he entered the service of I.G. Colors, for its Paris showing he was active. He belonged to the SA and SS - Reiter. The Royal Institute for War Documentation was also evidence of his membership in the NSDAP .

Translation: Here, the attached to the German national anthem by the Nazis Horst Wessel song came to be heard . Juliana and Bernhard based Soestdijk Palace .

The Nazi-Bilderberg connection is uncanny and undeniable. Conspiracies do exist, you just fail to realize the difference between conspiracy theories and conspiracy realities. Bilderberg is a Neo-Fascist/Imperialist terrorist organization. The simple fact that Bernhard was a Nazi at all brings into scrutiny and suspicion ANYTHING he has done, top that off with the fact that Bilderberg refuses any media access to their inner workings. What are they hiding? Occam's Razor stipulates something Aryan in nature.
Click to expand...

Refer back to said Post #27 (3 posts before this post of yours I have quoted), and present links to counter-evidence of your claim of this being a conspiracy theory. You made the claim that this was a conspiracy theory, you now have to prove that Prince Bernhard and Bilderberg are not Neo-Nazis. Can you do that? I don't think you can. Occam's Razor is not on your side in this debate. It is simple fact that the founder of Bilderberg was a Nazi.

Sweden, you are welcome to do so as well.

(PS: I am not a believer in a New World Order conspiracy to rule the world. Nor do I believe in the John Birth society of religious radicals, the idiot hypocrite Alex Jones, or the ridiculous assertions of people trying to say that the global elite control all elections directly and are trying to enslave humanity and are Satanists worshipping Moloch at Bohemian Grove. So, please, do not lump me in with that conspiracy theorist crowd with non-sequitors and ad-hominems and actually provide a legitimate intelligent discussion of why you believe the way you do despite evidence of Bilderberg's origins as a Nazi organization; I want an intelligent discussion and rebuttal from you, not the hand-waving cop-out logical fallacy I always get from people trying to (incorrectly and fallaciously) dismiss me as a 'conspiracy theorist'.)
 
Last edited:
yankintx said:
I would be more concerned for the monarchies survival post Elizabeth II. In the meantime, she is not going anywhere, and the British people seem to like it that way. One only need to look how partisan politics plays a role in the top job for he USA and France to realize that perhaps the Brits should keep the status qua.
Click to expand...

How does partisan politics not play a role in the British Prime Ministry? Labour and Conservative sounds a lot like their version of 'Republican and Democrat'...
 
gunner said:
And for some reason, I've not come across another nation who has a sausage like ours :lol:
Click to expand...

You need to do more travelling in countries where pork is king, Paul! There are Spanish, German, Italian, Thai and Scandiwegian sausages that are every bit as amazing as any British banger I've ever tried.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
How does partisan politics not play a role in the British Prime Ministry? Labour and Conservative sounds a lot like their version of 'Republican and Democrat'...
Click to expand...

I think the point he's making (and even for a republican like me, a compelling one) is that the existence of the monarchy takes partisan politics out of the appointment and functioning of the Head of State. It's not a fundamentally political role in a monarchy, whereas in full presidential systems Head of State and Head of Government are inextricably linked, and to no one's particular benefit.

Selecting a Prime Minister is a deeply partisan affair. The succession of a monarch as Head of State isn't.
 
Andalublue said:
I think the point he's making (and even for a republican like me, a compelling one) is that the existence of the monarchy takes partisan politics out of the appointment and functioning of the Head of State. It's not a fundamentally political role in a monarchy, whereas in full presidential systems Head of State and Head of Government are inextricably linked, and to no one's particular benefit.

Selecting a Prime Minister is a deeply partisan affair. The succession of a monarch as Head of State isn't.
Click to expand...

OK, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up. :)
 
Abbazorkzog said:
I think it could be good if someone better than Queen Elizabeth takes over. Queen Elizabeth is too stuck in her old ways to be any force of progressivism.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter much if the Queen goes or stays as the real power is in the hands of the Prime Minister. Since the Queen will be over 89 soon, it seems to me prudent if she were to abdicate and allow Charles to take over and continue the royal duties. Since the Monarchy is part & parcel of the British cultural heritage, it will always play a significant role in the heart of the British people. I recall when Princess Diana passed away. Many of the British populace were overwhelmed with grief as if a member of their immediate family had died.

As an American I am fascinated by the British Royals which extends all the way back to the Tudors, and to a lesser degree, other European royals.
 
Andalublue said:
You need to do more travelling in countries where pork is king, Paul! There are Spanish, German, Italian, Thai and Scandiwegian sausages that are every bit as amazing as any British banger I've ever tried.
Click to expand...

I've been all those places Andy, but they just don't sit well with a fry up!

These are king, Andy:Home - The Black Farmer
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom