Go Nick Clegg
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-04-2014, 01:46 AM (This post was last modified: 26-04-2014 01:49 AM by Mathilda.)
RE: Go Nick Clegg
(25-04-2014 07:14 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  You assume, most likely wrongfully, that the Royals perceive themselves as above the regular Joe. Which is "royalism" (for lack of better word to describe it).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/t...esses.html


Quote:The new rules of Court make it clear that the former Kate Middleton, when she is not accompanied by Prince William, must curtsy to the “blood princesses”, the Princess Royal, Princess Alexandra, and the daughters of the Duke of York, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie.

When William is with her, Kate does not need to bend the knee to either of them, but she must curtsy to the Prince of Wales, the Duchess of Cornwall, the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
26-04-2014, 11:12 AM
RE: Go Nick Clegg
From purely a financial standpoint, outside of tourism, people seem to forget that the royal family give the UK government all income recieved from the crown estates, in return for a stipend.The money recieved from these estates more than cover the stipend given.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2014, 10:51 PM
RE: Go Nick Clegg
(25-04-2014 05:12 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(25-04-2014 11:57 AM)Sam Wrote:  Because they live a life of wealth and luxury at the taxpayer's expense, and don't exactly do anything beyond speeches and opening ceremonies.

We can't vote for someone else if we don't like the current head of state, and we as citizens are regarded as "subjects".

No ordinary person can become head of state, because they have to be of "royal blood". An idea that deems everyone else inferior. Therefore, how can they be representative of the nation?

Fuck that... Monarchies are a system several centuries out of date. Its at odds with a liberal democracy that values equality.

EDIT:

Not to mention being a relic of colonialism...

One could make a similar argument for America right now.
Not a Clinton or Bush or Kennedy or whatever else family? Opps, unlucky. Oh well, better luck next life.

The point is that life isn't equal. People are born rich or born poor, born into families with power or born as Indian untouchables.
The argument against the royals that "they were born into it, thus let's get rid of them" is ridiculous because that applies to all aspects of life.
You'd need to live in a true communism country to achieve everyone being equal which is fucking awful (communism is fucking awful is what I'm saying).

How is the royals being born into that family any different to you being born into your family with regard to some poor African? Why should you live in a cushy western country while the majority of the world lives in poverty? Are you giving up all your possessions and giving them to Africa? Nope. You're a hypocrite.

Also, the royal family brings in tourism (America loves them some royals) and the members of the family do service to the country. ie: Those ceremonies and shit that you mentioned, yeah they do it so the PM doesn't have to to so he can continue to the run the country. The Prince's also served in the military.

Also, Kate isn't of royal blood so fuck you.

Kate isn't destined to be head of state... William is.

I don't see the need for pomp and ceremony anyway. I never have. Its a waste of money and time, in my opinion on a par with religious rituals. So why do we need a tax funded organization simply for the purpose of farting about in silly hats?

My beef with the royals isn't so much the fact they're rich... Its the fact they are painted as superior beings, and that we mere mortals should bow and scrape before them. And the fact we can't vote for a different one if we don't like the current one.

I don't give a fuck what any tradition says, I refuse to be classed as a "subject"...

And fuck you too...

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Sam's post
27-04-2014, 07:00 PM
RE: Go Nick Clegg
(26-04-2014 01:46 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(25-04-2014 07:14 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  You assume, most likely wrongfully, that the Royals perceive themselves as above the regular Joe. Which is "royalism" (for lack of better word to describe it).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/t...esses.html


Quote:The new rules of Court make it clear that the former Kate Middleton, when she is not accompanied by Prince William, must curtsy to the “blood princesses”, the Princess Royal, Princess Alexandra, and the daughters of the Duke of York, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie.

When William is with her, Kate does not need to bend the knee to either of them, but she must curtsy to the Prince of Wales, the Duchess of Cornwall, the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh.

I don't see that as believing they are superior, it's simply a matter of image. Any company that's big enough to worry about PR will tell you how important perception is, the Royals are no different PR-wise.

And each organisation tailors how it tries to viewed based on what it is associated with (and what it wants to be associated with). If you went and saw a business meeting, or corporate event, at say a bank you'd see people in smart suits. That's because the organisation needs to be seen as professional. If you turn up at the office of a company that's more based around creativity (such as a video game company) you'll see people more casually dressed. Those organisations want to be seen as more casual and individual.

The Royal Family are relics of history. Their original reasons for existing no longer apply but they generate a sense of (for want of a better word) patriotism in some people and because of the history and tradition surrounding them they hold a lot of fascination for a lot of people too. They are also something unique as no other country has a Royal Family that are so prominent on the world stage. Their prominence and ability to generate revenue/patriotism make them worth keeping. However, as the allure for a lot of people is the history and tradition the Royal Family themselves have to act in keeping with that (just as the banks look professional and gaming companies creative), if they don't then they lose most of their appeal. It's not necessarily superiority on their part, it's simply understanding that formality and tradition are makes them appealing to a lot of people and acting in accordance with it.

That is also linked to why they are afforded so much respect and are not democratically elected and removed. They get respect such open respect because the people giving it to them want to, that's their choice. The people encouraging it understand the benefits of doing so. They aren't democratic because making such such a huge change to them would remove pretty much all the appeal they have.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-04-2014, 09:39 PM
RE: Go Nick Clegg
(27-04-2014 07:00 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  
(26-04-2014 01:46 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/t...esses.html

I don't see that as believing they are superior, it's simply a matter of image. Any company that's big enough to worry about PR will tell you how important perception is, the Royals are no different PR-wise.

And each organisation tailors how it tries to viewed based on what it is associated with (and what it wants to be associated with). If you went and saw a business meeting, or corporate event, at say a bank you'd see people in smart suits. That's because the organisation needs to be seen as professional. If you turn up at the office of a company that's more based around creativity (such as a video game company) you'll see people more casually dressed. Those organisations want to be seen as more casual and individual.

The Royal Family are relics of history. Their original reasons for existing no longer apply but they generate a sense of (for want of a better word) patriotism in some people and because of the history and tradition surrounding them they hold a lot of fascination for a lot of people too. They are also something unique as no other country has a Royal Family that are so prominent on the world stage. Their prominence and ability to generate revenue/patriotism make them worth keeping. However, as the allure for a lot of people is the history and tradition the Royal Family themselves have to act in keeping with that (just as the banks look professional and gaming companies creative), if they don't then they lose most of their appeal. It's not necessarily superiority on their part, it's simply understanding that formality and tradition are makes them appealing to a lot of people and acting in accordance with it.

That is also linked to why they are afforded so much respect and are not democratically elected and removed. They get respect such open respect because the people giving it to them want to, that's their choice. The people encouraging it understand the benefits of doing so. They aren't democratic because making such such a huge change to them would remove pretty much all the appeal they have.

No its not PR... Making non-blood family members bow and curtsey in private is not PR. Its anal and snobbery. Public Relations means exactly that, how you relate to the public... What does this attitude actually say to the public? To me it says "we're better than you, so grovel."

OK, tourism, sure I'll hand it to you, British history is big business... But I genuinely think that this country's preoccupation with the past is a problem. What about the future... When are we going to move on? I'm not talking about museums and historical sites... But the actual system of how we're governed, and who represents us to the rest of the world.

The royals are not representative of ordinary people... And they never will be.

Quite simply, I like democracy, liberty and equality... So long as we have undemocratic, unrepresentative bodies like the royals and the lords, we're not a democracy.

I'm dissatisfied with our current head of state, and not exactly thrilled about the people prearranged to succeed her, and I would like to vote for someone else... But this is denied to us.

What if something happened to change the public's opinion of the royals? Something that made a significant proportion of the population want someone else as their representative. It'd be tough shit because we are not citizens, but subjects, and don't have the right to remove the monarch, who is after all chosen by God himself. A being I don't believe exists. Its all fine while the queen is popular, but if ever she became very unpopular, there's nothing we could do about it, and we'd just have to hope she'd have the decency to abdicate.

But, somehow I think if there was any serious, genuinely shocking scandal involving the royal family, it'd be suppressed and swept under the carpet. Further subverting our democracy.

It amazes me that the country tolerates prince Philip's racist and misanthropic beliefs. He's been quoted as saying he wishes a pandemic would wipe out half the world's population. What a nice bloke...

I think democracy is far more important than tourism or tradition... And in my eyes always will be.

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Sam's post
28-04-2014, 05:03 AM
RE: Go Nick Clegg
Lets be honest here, the royals have no political power. Any position they do have is essentially part of tradition, and something that they couldn't really use in their favour. Calling the British public "subjects" is essentially an empty statement, as we aren't required to pay them any sort of homage, and the fact we're having this discussion in a public forum shows freedom.

Incidentally, i'd imagine if enough people did want them removed, our politics would start to evolve around this. The people of this country took away most of their power in the past, if we wanted to do this again, i'd imagine it'd be infinitely easier this time.

Equally, the House of Lords can be forced to accept policy if Commons forces it through. While I agree on the public having more say on who sits there, the current biggest issue with the HoL is the fact that bishops get several seats on there.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: