The Royal family

[Unknown user]

1 hour ago, FWJ said:

Of course there is - but there’s also a middle ground between being a forelock-tugging, knee-bending, Union Jack-bedecked, Jubilee teacup-collecting monarchist and feeling that if the country were a republic it would be a new paradise where flogging off palaces and crowns would end our money woes forever.

 

Being a monarchy doesn’t seem to have held back places like the Netherlands, Sweden and Luxembourg (ok it’s a Grand Duchy).  I just think if it ain’t broke why fix it?  In what ways would the country be better if it were a republic?

We wouldn't be funding a family of ultra elite wankers who think they have the right to rule over us.

We'd be able to return billions in assets and property to the nation.

 

In what way would it be worse without them?

[FWJ]

42 minutes ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

I think the argument is ideological  / philosophical.  Is there an impact on the country of there being a ruling class, headed by a ruling family, that nobody can get rid of? Many would say there was.  It's linked to all the old etonian BS too. 

 

I'm not saying on day one the country would become a utopia, but it's possible that a truly egalitarian, democratic society would be one that over time would become more equitable. 

 

... it's one way of looking at it

It is indeed.  (As I feel I need to keep pointing out) I’m not fanatical about it …. but looking around the world some of the most egalitarian, democratic and equitable countries (eg Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Canada, New Zealand) are monarchies.  Indeed, looking at lists of countries with the highest ‘Human Development’ indices and best ‘Gini’ figures, constitutional monarchies appear over-represented.

 

How much would a president cost?  How much would presidential elections cost?  Would they even be elected by popular vote or by parliament?

There’s always a whiff of politics about any candidate and that will alienate those that didn’t vote for them.  How many people would bother voting?  There are some theories that a constitutional monarchy is more democratic (unintuitively) because there is always a hint of legitimacy to even a figurehead president which leads them to stick their nose into politics, whereas everyone knows that there is no legitimacy to monarchy so they steer well clear.

Or at least they should.  I’m concerned that Charles (or George VII as I believe he will be called) will stick his nose in, and that will be a problem.

Edited May 11, 2022 by FWJ

[FWJ]

3 minutes ago, Smithee said:

We wouldn't be funding a family of ultra elite wankers who think they have the right to rule over us.

We'd be able to return billions in assets and property to the nation.

 

In what way would it be worse without them?

President Farage.

[Unknown user]

Just now, FWJ said:

President Farage.

 

The Queef does **** all but wave, she isn't protecting democracy, she isn't all that stands between us and the portals of hell.

 

There's no good reason for keeping them.

[FWJ]

25 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

The Queef does **** all but wave, she isn't protecting democracy, she isn't all that stands between us and the portals of hell.

 

There's no good reason for keeping them.

Change (huge, uncharted constitutional) change for the sake of it.

There’s no good reason to turn the country upside-down.

If it ain’t broke why fix it.

 

Of course it might not be President Farage.  Knowing this country it would be President Britain’sGotTheCelebrityBigX-FactorBrotherInTheJungleOnIce… McBoatface.

Edited May 11, 2022 by FWJ

[Unknown user]

8 minutes ago, FWJ said:

Change (huge, uncharted) constitutional) change for the sake of it.

There’s no good reason to turn the country upside-down.

If it ain’t broke why fix it.

 

Of course it might not be

President Farage.  Knowing this country it would be President Britain’sGotTheCelebrityBigX-FactorBrotherInTheJungleOnIce… McBoatface.

 

Your argument is that this hereditary group of wankers is what stands between us and terrible democratic things, it's as weak as I can think of!

 

If it ain't broke...

 

You dont think Britain's broken with the worst of democracy already on display? And what's the Queef doing about it? She can't even shit without help ffs, she's not going to fly down and dump Boris in the Thames.

[FWJ]

29 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Your argument is that this hereditary group of wankers is what stands between us and terrible democratic things, it's as weak as I can think of!

 

If it ain't broke...

 

You dont think Britain's broken with the worst of democracy already on display? And what's the Queef doing about it? She can't even shit without help ffs, she's not going to fly down and dump Boris in the Thames.

Well, we don’t agree.  

[Unknown user]

3 minutes ago, FWJ said:

Well, we don’t agree.  

 

It was close, things nearly went bosoms skyward, but thankfully Chuckwit was on hand to fight Farage off and get the democratic engine turning over

 

 

 

[John Findlay]

46 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

 

You dont think Britain's broken with the worst of democracy already on display? And what's the Queef doing about it? She can't even shit without help ffs, she's not going to fly down and dump Boris in the Thames.

Let's hope that you will never need help to defecate. Then again alot of it does leave your body through your mouth.

[FWJ]

8 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

It was close, things nearly went bosoms skyward, but thankfully Chuckwit was on hand to fight Farage off and get the democratic engine turning over

 

 

 

Well of course someone else wrote it. That’s what constitutional monarchy is/does.

 

I clearly don’t feel as strongly for as everyone else does against.  (It’s the trams all over again!)

[Shooter McGavin]

Foodbanks, OAPs getting on the bus cause it’s their only access to heat, children forced to starve during school holidays and adults now skipping meals as they can’t afford to eat.

 

And we’ve just witnessed a three car fleet made up of Rolls Royces being used to carry a crown littered with jewels, and a man sitting in a golden throne encrusted with jewels, talking about the cost-of-living crisis.

 

And the only argument for this nonsense is from docile people who will tell you “Oh but there’s always been a Royal Family” or “It’s a British tradition”

[FWJ]

28 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Foodbanks, OAPs getting on the bus cause it’s their only access to heat, children forced to starve during school holidays and adults now skipping meals as they can’t afford to eat.

 

And we’ve just witnessed a three car fleet made up of Rolls Royces being used to carry a crown littered with jewels, and a man sitting in a golden throne encrusted with jewels, talking about the cost-of-living crisis.

 

And the only argument for this nonsense is from docile people who will tell you “Oh but there’s always been a Royal Family” or “It’s a British tradition”

Well, no.  Not the only argument. For example, how much money would we s***k every 4 years or so on a presidential election?  

 

.

Edited May 11, 2022 by FWJ

[kila]

The Royals epitomise inequality and are nothing but greedy *****.

 

The extended family is ridiculous and we all foot their bill for their lifestyle.

 

Couldn't give a shit if any of them died in a terrible accident, but it saddens me that others buy into this bullshit so much they'd line the streets for them.

 

Edited May 11, 2022 by kila

[Shooter McGavin]

6 minutes ago, FWJ said:

Well, no.  Not the only argument. For example, how much money would we s***k every 4 years or so on a presidential election?  

 

.

I don’t know that figure, but at least it would be a democratic election, rather than people being born into ruling us.

 

I’d much rather taxpayers money went into democratic elections, as unpalatable as the current lot are, and a democratic system etc, than refurbishing a literal palace, or heating said palace when there’s billions of pounds worth of stolen jewels within it and meanwhile up and down the country, kids are literally shaking with hunger.

To have a monarch is 2022 is a riddy, to be honest.

 

[Unknown user]

23 minutes ago, FWJ said:

Well, no.  Not the only argument. For example, how much money would we s***k every 4 years or so on a presidential election?  

 

.

Tell you what then, I'll be king. I'll do it for half the money, give all the property back to the nation and it'll just be me and the dog, no hangers on or staff required. All we ask is a tiny mansion with a few acres for her to run about in and a priceless hat.

[FWJ]

Do they “rule” us?  The comments on this thread would suggest not.

[Unknown user]

54 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

Let's hope that you will never need help to defecate. Then again alot of it does leave your body through your mouth.

 

Let's hope you make a relevant point one day instead of playing the man.

 

[FWJ]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

Tell you what then, I'll be king. I'll do it for half the money, give all the property back to the nation and it'll just be me and the dog, no hangers on or staff required. All we ask is a tiny mansion with a few acres for her to run about in and a priceless hat.

That sounds even less democratic than a constitutional monarchy.

[Unknown user]

Just now, FWJ said:

That sounds even less democratic than a constitutional monarchy.

Exactly the same as now but cheaper 🤷‍♂️

[FWJ]

3 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Let's hope you make a relevant point one day instead of playing the man.

 

TBF I’m not sure how relevant or useful describing the monarch and her family as shape-shifting “lizard creatures” is either.

[Unknown user]

Just now, FWJ said:

TBF I’m not sure how relevant or useful describing the monarch and her family as shape-shifting “lizard creatures” is either.

 

Bit of a false equivalence, I wasn't attacking the poster and it was in a post making a legitimate point.

[FWJ]

4 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Exactly the same as now but cheaper 🤷‍♂️

How about you get enough people to want a republic.  If there was enough of a groundswell we’d have a vote (or elect a republican party) and they’d be gone.

As for people who want them dead, or want to kill them - I’m not sure if I’d want to live in their republic.

 

 

[Unknown user]

Just now, FWJ said:

How about you get enough people to want a republic.  If there was enough of a groundswell we’d have a vote (or elect a republican party) and they’d be gone.

As for people who want them dead, or want to kill them - I’m not sure if I’d want to live in their republic.

 

There really is no justification for a monarchy, what a ridiculous concept

[Shooter McGavin]

6 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Bit of a false equivalence, I wasn't attacking the poster and it was in a post making a legitimate point.

False equivalence is his speciality,

 

I’ve mentioned foodbanks, pensioners who can’t heat their homes, children starving, and his only return was claiming that the horrible alternative to all of that was a democratic election.

[John Findlay]

25 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Let's hope you make a relevant point one day instead of playing the man.

 

🤣🤣🤣🤣

[FWJ]

21 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

False equivalence is his speciality,

 

I’ve mentioned foodbanks, pensioners who can’t heat their homes, children starving, and his only return was claiming that the horrible alternative to all of that was a democratic election.

No need to be rude, I’m trying to keep things civil. 

 

Would these things be cured by having a president?

[A Boy Named Crow]

1 hour ago, FWJ said:

Well, no.  Not the only argument. For example, how much money would we s***k every 4 years or so on a presidential election?  

 

.

None at all.  The head of state should be like jury duty, any punter can be called up to do their stint. 

[FWJ]

14 minutes ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

None at all.  The head of state should be like jury duty, any punter can be called up to do their stint. 

Really?

[Shooter McGavin]

37 minutes ago, FWJ said:

No need to be rude, I’m trying to keep things civil. 

 

Would these things be cured by having a president?

Again, children are so starving, but being “rude” is what sticks in your craw.

It may cure it, it may not.

 

I’d just rather live in a country where we didn’t have all those things aforementioned, whilst someone who lives in an enormous palace filled with jewels, can sit in a golden throne and talk about how the cost-of-living crisis is a priority.

 

An utterly bizarre state of affairs.

[A Boy Named Crow]

5 minutes ago, FWJ said:

Really?

Sure, don't allow them any power,  just let them open supermarkets and make small talk at garden parties. Easy. 

[Jambo 4 Ever]

Prince William is at tynecastle today 

[Jeffros Furios]

8 minutes ago, Jambo 4 Ever said:

Prince William is at tynecastle today 

Any photos ? 

[JudyJudyJudy]

Get shot of them all . Ludicrous in this day and age to have Princes and Princesses and Kings and Queens ! A relic of elitism and establishment. Pension the old ones off , the younger ones can earn a living like the rest of us . Flogg the palaces or redevelop them  into social housing 

[Der Kaiser]

12 minutes ago, Jambo 4 Ever said:

Prince William is at tynecastle today 

 

What position does he play?

[Shooter McGavin]

[SuperstarSteve]

When the queen is gone a vote should be put to the people. Keep them or Get rid. If that’s even possible. 

[Unknown user]

[FWJ]

50 minutes ago, SuperstarSteve said:

When the queen is gone a vote should be put to the people. Keep them or Get rid. If that’s even possible. 

Yup.

We should have a vote on whether we become a republic or not, I agree.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

19 hours ago, FWJ said:

Not seeing much evidence of people “on their knees” on this thread.

 

I have dual nationality and was born in a republic. I will never bow to the monarchs and if I want them to end up like the Romanovs, children and all, that is my right.

[FWJ]

1 hour ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Again, children are so starving, but being “rude” is what sticks in your craw.

It may cure it, it may not.

 

I’d just rather live in a country where we didn’t have all those things aforementioned, whilst someone who lives in an enormous palace filled with jewels, can sit in a golden throne and talk about how the cost-of-living crisis is a priority.

 

An utterly bizarre state of affairs.

No, it’s not what sticks in my craw and I’m pretty sure you know that.

Prince Charles read out what he was told to read out by the democratically elected government.  Not elected by me, I should add, I think they are dreadful.

[FWJ]

5 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

I have dual nationality and was born in a republic. I will never bow to the monarchs and if I want them to end up like the Romanovs, children and all, that is my right.

Not sure anyone is asking you to bow to a monarch and it absolutely your right not to.

And if you approve of shooting and bayoneting children to death that’s absolutely your right too.

Just as it’s my right to consider that shameful.

Edited May 11, 2022 by FWJ

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

2 minutes ago, FWJ said:

Not sure anyone is asking you to bow to a monarch and it absolutely your right not to.

And if you approve of shooting and bayoneting children to death that’s absolutely your right too.

Just as it’s my right to consider that shameful.

The only way to end the bloodline.

[FWJ]

I’m going to be a huge hypocrite (after asking to keep things civil) and say that I don’t believe that you do approve of the killing of children.

If you honestly do, my apologies for not believing you but absolutely not for considering that shameful.  Actually really, really shocking.

 

Still, at least it demonstrates that all this talk of bowing and scraping and grovelling are nonsense.

 

I don’t really have any more to add.  This has reached a new nadir.

Edited May 11, 2022 by FWJ

[il Duce McTarkin]

We need more executing children based on which vagina they fell out of imo.

[JudyJudyJudy]

11 minutes ago, FWJ said:

I’m going to be a huge hypocrite (after asking to keep things civil) and say that I don’t believe that you do approve of the killing of children.

If you honestly do, my apologies for not believing you but absolutely not for considering that shameful.  Actually really, really shocking.

 

Still, at least it demonstrates that all this talk of bowing and scraping and grovelling are nonsense.

 

I don’t really have any more to add.  This has reached a new nadir.

The thing is the Romanov executions didn’t end the bloodline anyway ! If one wanted to end the Royal bloodline there would be piles of corpses all over Europe’s as the royals are all interlinked . Just end the monarchy , they shuffle off in the sunset . It’s had a great inninigs 

[jack D and coke]

6 minutes ago, Dirk McClaymore said:

We need more executing children based on which vagina they fell out of imo.

Makes about as much sense as falling out one that entitles you to a life of titles, palaces, luxury and riches tbh…

Caucescau style endings for them imo. Make a cracking WhatsApp video to send aboot to pals too! 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

4 hours ago, kila said:

The Royals epitomise inequality and are nothing but greedy *****.

 

The extended family is ridiculous and we all foot their bill for their lifestyle.

 

Couldn't give a shit if any of them died in a terrible accident, but it saddens me that others buy into this bullshit so much they'd line the streets for them.

 

 

I don't think so, sure that was all stopped a number of years ago, seem to recall one or two of them kicking up a fuss about having to get a job.   I think it's only the Queen who gets money from the public purse nowadays.

 

Edited May 11, 2022 by Jambo-Jimbo

[il Duce McTarkin]

7 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

 

Makes about as much sense as falling out one that entitles you to a life of titles, palaces, luxury and riches tbh…

 

 

Wrong. Only one involves the execution of children for being born.

 

 

8 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

 

Caucescau style endings for them imo. Make a cracking WhatsApp video to send aboot to pals too! 

 

 

 

I'll give you that, although the 'Gaddafi with bayonet up his erse' video will be hard to top.

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

I don't think so, sure that was all stopped a number of years ago, seem to recall one or two of them kicking up a fuss about having to get a job.   I think it's only the Queen who gets money from the public purse nowadays.

 

 

They've earned enough off the backs of their people and other people overseas over the centuries to be able to live off the interest from their financial holdings with nary a blink. The question isn't whether we should be giving them money, it's what and how much we should we be reappropriating for the state from their vast collection of estates and possessions in order to redress the injustices of the past on which they built their wealth.

[jack D and coke]

6 minutes ago, Dirk McClaymore said:

 

Wrong. Only one involves the execution of children for being born.

 

 

 

 

I'll give you that, although the 'Gaddafi with bayonet up his erse' video will be hard to top.

Forgot about that one😳😂