You can spot the racists who are trying to incite hatred as is the leftist way. Constantinople, Barry and the same old faces. The only ones who ever bring up skin colour
I remember at school we had a "skin colour" Crayola crayon. Anyone remember that?
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can spot the racists who are trying to incite hatred as is the leftist way. Constantinople, Barry and the same old faces. The only ones who ever bring up skin colour
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Could you please stop talking about skin colour
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 14 seconds ago
I remember at school we had a "skin colour" Crayola crayon. Anyone remember that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed. It’s so typical online and in modern times to have your views challenged with logic and reason only to reply with ad hominem & abuse to only get further detailed points completely refuting their point of view only to ignore it completely, stop replying and continue to think as they did before.
Like I said, ideologically possessed.
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 3 minutes ago
You can spot the racists who are trying to incite hatred as is the leftist way. Constantinople, Barry and the same old faces. The only ones who ever bring up skin colour
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow.
All we want is to take ARE country back from the foreigns.
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t ignored any of his message. And I’ve made one passing reference to the media, and given a concrete example - with a citation - of the way in which the Royal’s are an extension of rapacious power, and how that *never* gets reported. And yet, ironically, Sat Nav thinks my opposition to the Royals is because of a hostile media that I’ve fallen for (despite the media not being hostile to the Royals in any meaningful way, not reporting on the important example I cited).
So I went down no such rabbit hole. It’s amazing how much people can’t seem to read & understand stuff that isn’t very complicated to grasp.
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
You can have a look around the palace if you like.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve actually no idea whether you can or can’t in that instance, but you get my point, right? The Royals *themselves* are not the tourist attraction - nobody gets to see them, just as nobody gets to meet a King or Ruler at Peterhof’s Palace.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're being silly now. No one would care if it wasn't a royal residence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as nobody cares at the example I gave? Looks like I’m not the one being silly! If you’re arguing nobody would turn up to ex-Royal buildings, may I suggest you visit some abroad and discover for yourself how wrong you are?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex royal buildings. Right. Which in itself makes my point. The fact they're royals is the draw. We're agreed on that.
So what's the benefit of making them ex royals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry but if you don’t already know the main arguments against the existence of a Royal Family, you’ll have to go and research it yourself. It’s way, way too long of an essay for me to do on my phone at 10pm on a Friday! 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough. I'm just curious of what you thought, because I don't see there being a huge upside, personally.
The land and assets would go to the State I guess, who’d likely share it amongst the powerful elite and their shell companies. Nothing would change for the average person.
I think 99% of the arguments are because of the bad press they get (completely valid), some sort of moral objection (I don't agree but ok), and the assumption that the alternative is better (completely misplaced IMO).
The actual monetary thing, I don't think there's a solid argument for. Not one I've seen anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most the press are slavishly pro-Royal. The odd scandal that hits the news benefits the press in terms of hits but the real scandals - the ones never reported - are for example things like the Royal Prerogative, whereby the Queen is used a political ‘get out of jail’ card for the state when the state has gotten itself into hot water. For example the invocation of the Royal Prerogative to deny the Chagossians the right of return to Diego Garcia after they won their case in the High Court. See: http://johnpilger.com/videos/stealing-a-nation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Guardian certainly isn't pro monarch and wants it abolished. Now I love the Guardian and have read it since it was The Manchester Guardian, but I disagree with them on this.
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems that you're uninformed/deluded about how the royal family is funded at your expense. Guess it would seem like just a bit of fun if that's where your knowledge ends
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe I am far less deluded than you. The cost per head is minimal, and offset by tourist income. Saying we should make them into a celebrity family on Netflix is ludicrous.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The cost per head for almost anything would be minimal if there's 60m heads. They are a celebrity family already, all I'm suggesting is those that are interested in them pay for them. I wouldn't mind paying for them if they were on UBI and struggling to find work btw, that isn't unreasonable
No one has mentioned the main important role of the royal that keeps them relevant; to help prop up dictators around the world.
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t ignored any of his message. And I’ve made one passing reference to the media, and given a concrete example - with a citation - of the way in which the Royal’s are an extension of rapacious power, and how that *never* gets reported. And yet, ironically, Sat Nav thinks my opposition to the Royals is because of a hostile media that I’ve fallen for (despite the media not being hostile to the Royals in any meaningful way, not reporting on the important example I cited).
So I went down no such rabbit hole. It’s amazing how much people can’t seem to read & understand stuff that isn’t very complicated to grasp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Looked to me like you picked the one bit of the message you could use to make your point and just ignored all the bits that went against the set idea you have in your head.
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 1 second ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 39 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 30 seconds ago
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
Look, boy meets girl, gets married, they decide they want to be together and not experience all the drama their family brings. The end. FFS move on, nobody cares, let them be.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How naive. One day you will learn that things are not this black and white. Or more specifically, not white, like Meghan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another racist. Why are you trying to bring race into it Barry? Dress it up as comedy all you want but you havent been funny for years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think Barry is being racist, you're thick. He's the opposite of racist, he's laughing at racists and they're so stupid they think he's on their side.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So why is he mentioning colour? It's incitment. I know all about Barry. He was funny in 2012.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think this place started in 2011 so that's a whole year to be fair. You had your time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancel culture trying to get Barry.
I thought his mob were against cancel culture.
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 1 minute ago
No one has mentioned the main important role of the royal that keeps them relevant; to help prop up dictators around the world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like the 'royal' Meg wearing earrings gifted from the vile murderous Saudi prince
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
We're Schit and we will tell everyone about how Schit the UK is.....how very droll.
It's been done to death, comrades and republicans.
Whinging p0ms ring any bells.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whinging P0M's is a reference to P0M's whinging about :" Oh its not like home." "Why can't they all just speak English" "We don't do it like that in Britain."
More a British Chauvinist than one who runs Britain down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Point taken.....you've ruined it now, mate.haha
It does get boring hearing folk put themselves and each other down daily, but it is a terribly English left wing trait, so jolly hockey sticks, wot wot, keep on self-hating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another odd comment. In my reply to you earlier I praised the British public for its successful defiance of injustices from abolition through to LGBT issues, all of which have and continue to contribute to a progressive & liberal & civilised society by international standards.
What you perceive as ‘self loathing’ is simply opposition to policies that cause harm that you simply don’t care to know about or actively support. That’s a problem that *you* have, not the people who want to try to make things better for others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which policies you speak of cause harm? And what would your answer be to them? As your beloved leader doesn't seem to have any answers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which “beloved leader” are you referring to?
Crikey, how do I even need to answer that question? Let’s take Britain’s policy of arming, supplying maintenance & loading services & operational control room assistance, training of fighter pilots & parliamentary cover for a state driving the world’s leading humanitarian disaster in Yemen. Or arming the majority of states on its own human rights abusers list. Or a decade of politically driven austerity. Or the invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq, the destruction of Libya based on lies. The completely botched handling of pandemic & outright corruption in profiteering from it. These are all policies that successive governments (Labour or Tory), have & continue to engage in, with predicted consequences. And I’m barely scratching the surface.
Opposing such things is not “self loathing”, as BlueBalls thinks. It’s the stance that any sane, compassionate & informed person should take on these and other issues.
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 8 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok and how much do they bring in again? Oh yeah hundreds of millions of pounds.
This is a simple diagram for you
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/secondary/Royal-tax-latest-news-crown-estate-news-royal-family-finances-2564559.jpg?r=tel:1594563000027
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I or you owned a huge oil field (for instance) by birthright we could rake in billions. Take what we see fit then give some back to the peasants who've paid for all the oil in the first place...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring in hundreds of millions every year, every year. And cost us hundreds of millions less. Hence profits to the ‘peasants’ of hundreds of millions a year.
Jesus Christ.
What harm does having a monarchy in the 21st century cause us? Please tell me, anyone??
Honestly it just boils down to clichéd flawed opinions based on poor media consumption.
The Windsors as a family are a bunch of morons on the whole and the Queen does do a lot for charity but as individuals they don’t have much of my respect and I don’t laud them but having a monarchy which is steeped in centuries and centuries of history and tradition in this country and the pride & pleasure that it brings most people in this country and millions around the world is undeniable.
If Liverpool say replaced YWNWA with the latest One Direction song because tradition is just for the brain-dead; how would that go down? Not very well I’m sure.
Tradition means something, history means something. Be proud that we have history and traditions like most other fking countries. Cup of tea, queen of England, fish and chips, queuing et cetera. They’re all pretty meaningless things, they’re not life and death matters but bloody hell what harm do they cause? Stop being such miserable fk fcks and enjoy some history ffs.
😂😂😂😂
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems that you're uninformed/deluded about how the royal family is funded at your expense. Guess it would seem like just a bit of fun if that's where your knowledge ends
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tell us how they’re funded please
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This gives some details if that's helpful https://www.statista.com/chart/18569/total-cost-of-the-uks-royal-family-by-year/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So about £6 per month if that's the figure at the top.
Their trying too cancel Barry cos people are offended about it being racist in cockney rhyming slang.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 8 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok and how much do they bring in again? Oh yeah hundreds of millions of pounds.
This is a simple diagram for you
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/secondary/Royal-tax-latest-news-crown-estate-news-royal-family-finances-2564559.jpg?r=tel:1594563000027
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I or you owned a huge oil field (for instance) by birthright we could rake in billions. Take what we see fit then give some back to the peasants who've paid for all the oil in the first place...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring in hundreds of millions every year, every year. And cost us hundreds of millions less. Hence profits to the ‘peasants’ of hundreds of millions a year.
Jesus Christ.
What harm does having a monarchy in the 21st century cause us? Please tell me, anyone??
Honestly it just boils down to clichéd flawed opinions based on poor media consumption.
The Windsors as a family are a bunch of morons on the whole and the Queen does do a lot for charity but as individuals they don’t have much of my respect and I don’t laud them but having a monarchy which is steeped in centuries and centuries of history and tradition in this country and the pride & pleasure that it brings most people in this country and millions around the world is undeniable.
If Liverpool say replaced YWNWA with the latest One Direction song because tradition is just for the brain-dead; how would that go down? Not very well I’m sure.
Tradition means something, history means something. Be proud that we have history and traditions like most other fking countries. Cup of tea, queen of England, fish and chips, queuing et cetera. They’re all pretty meaningless things, they’re not life and death matters but bloody hell what harm do they cause? Stop being such miserable fk fcks and enjoy some history ffs.
😂😂😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess traditionally you could behead them and take over, not a bad shout
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
We're Schit and we will tell everyone about how Schit the UK is.....how very droll.
It's been done to death, comrades and republicans.
Whinging p0ms ring any bells.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whinging P0M's is a reference to P0M's whinging about :" Oh its not like home." "Why can't they all just speak English" "We don't do it like that in Britain."
More a British Chauvinist than one who runs Britain down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Point taken.....you've ruined it now, mate.haha
It does get boring hearing folk put themselves and each other down daily, but it is a terribly English left wing trait, so jolly hockey sticks, wot wot, keep on self-hating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another odd comment. In my reply to you earlier I praised the British public for its successful defiance of injustices from abolition through to LGBT issues, all of which have and continue to contribute to a progressive & liberal & civilised society by international standards.
What you perceive as ‘self loathing’ is simply opposition to policies that cause harm that you simply don’t care to know about or actively support. That’s a problem that *you* have, not the people who want to try to make things better for others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which policies you speak of cause harm? And what would your answer be to them? As your beloved leader doesn't seem to have any answers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which “beloved leader” are you referring to?
Crikey, how do I even need to answer that question? Let’s take Britain’s policy of arming, supplying maintenance & loading services & operational control room assistance, training of fighter pilots & parliamentary cover for a state driving the world’s leading humanitarian disaster in Yemen. Or arming the majority of states on its own human rights abusers list. Or a decade of politically driven austerity. Or the invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq, the destruction of Libya based on lies. The completely botched handling of pandemic & outright corruption in profiteering from it. These are all policies that successive governments (Labour or Tory), have & continue to engage in, with predicted consequences. And I’m barely scratching the surface.
Opposing such things is not “self loathing”, as BlueBalls thinks. It’s the stance that any sane, compassionate & informed person should take on these and other issues.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So Labour would have handled the pandemic better? Speaking of human rights abuse I see it every day under khan's london
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 8 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok and how much do they bring in again? Oh yeah hundreds of millions of pounds.
This is a simple diagram for you
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/secondary/Royal-tax-latest-news-crown-estate-news-royal-family-finances-2564559.jpg?r=tel:1594563000027
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I or you owned a huge oil field (for instance) by birthright we could rake in billions. Take what we see fit then give some back to the peasants who've paid for all the oil in the first place...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring in hundreds of millions every year, every year. And cost us hundreds of millions less. Hence profits to the ‘peasants’ of hundreds of millions a year.
Jesus Christ.
What harm does having a monarchy in the 21st century cause us? Please tell me, anyone??
Honestly it just boils down to clichéd flawed opinions based on poor media consumption.
The Windsors as a family are a bunch of morons on the whole and the Queen does do a lot for charity but as individuals they don’t have much of my respect and I don’t laud them but having a monarchy which is steeped in centuries and centuries of history and tradition in this country and the pride & pleasure that it brings most people in this country and millions around the world is undeniable.
If Liverpool say replaced YWNWA with the latest One Direction song because tradition is just for the brain-dead; how would that go down? Not very well I’m sure.
Tradition means something, history means something. Be proud that we have history and traditions like most other fking countries. Cup of tea, queen of England, fish and chips, queuing et cetera. They’re all pretty meaningless things, they’re not life and death matters but bloody hell what harm do they cause? Stop being such miserable fk fcks and enjoy some history ffs.
😂😂😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can have history without a servile attitude to a family that hit jackpot in the birth lottery.
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t ignored any of his message. And I’ve made one passing reference to the media, and given a concrete example - with a citation - of the way in which the Royal’s are an extension of rapacious power, and how that *never* gets reported. And yet, ironically, Sat Nav thinks my opposition to the Royals is because of a hostile media that I’ve fallen for (despite the media not being hostile to the Royals in any meaningful way, not reporting on the important example I cited).
So I went down no such rabbit hole. It’s amazing how much people can’t seem to read & understand stuff that isn’t very complicated to grasp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well try to help me grasp this then oh enlightened one:
What harm does the monarchy cause us?
Citing a story about the monarchs and concluding that the press is completely pro-monarchy (which isn’t a surprise given that the majority of the country is) doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.
How many articles have been in the press about how much they ‘cost’ the taxpayer? When in reality they bring in far more than they cost.
The Diana stories were hardly purely pro-monarchy
This current story is very divided with most siding with Harry & Meghan.
So Labour would have handled the pandemic better? Speaking of human rights abuse I see it every day under khan's london
___________
This should be interesting
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t ignored any of his message. And I’ve made one passing reference to the media, and given a concrete example - with a citation - of the way in which the Royal’s are an extension of rapacious power, and how that *never* gets reported. And yet, ironically, Sat Nav thinks my opposition to the Royals is because of a hostile media that I’ve fallen for (despite the media not being hostile to the Royals in any meaningful way, not reporting on the important example I cited).
So I went down no such rabbit hole. It’s amazing how much people can’t seem to read & understand stuff that isn’t very complicated to grasp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Looked to me like you picked the one bit of the message you could use to make your point and just ignored all the bits that went against the set idea you have in your head.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I used that part because it neatly segued into starting to answer his previous post about why/what my opposition to the RF was based on. As I said - would require some seriously long replies in the main, but I could at least offer one very serious example that virtually nobody knows about precisely because it *doesn’t get reported*. Remember that for context, on more than one occasion I’d been accused of opposing the Royals because of what the media say. So I was killing two birds with one stone. A) here’s an important reason (royal prerogative/Diego Garcia) & b) given it not reported at all, it can’t be because of the media.
Clear enough?
comment by The Post Nearly Man. 20times, 20legend (U1270)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 1 second ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 39 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 30 seconds ago
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
Look, boy meets girl, gets married, they decide they want to be together and not experience all the drama their family brings. The end. FFS move on, nobody cares, let them be.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How naive. One day you will learn that things are not this black and white. Or more specifically, not white, like Meghan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another racist. Why are you trying to bring race into it Barry? Dress it up as comedy all you want but you havent been funny for years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think Barry is being racist, you're thick. He's the opposite of racist, he's laughing at racists and they're so stupid they think he's on their side.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So why is he mentioning colour? It's incitment. I know all about Barry. He was funny in 2012.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think this place started in 2011 so that's a whole year to be fair. You had your time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancel culture trying to get Barry.
I thought his mob were against cancel culture.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are, that's why the Royal Family are still of importance. But also we should remember the decorated men who took Britain around the world and pillaged countries and took their natives as slaves.
FFS people you can still be proud of your country and accept it had blame in the past.
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 39 seconds ago
So Labour would have handled the pandemic better? Speaking of human rights abuse I see it every day under khan's london
___________
This should be interesting
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's the classic straw man argument.
You can't criticise this because that would have been worse.
Honestly, identity politics is all the right have these days.
Sign in if you want to comment
Meghan Markle and Royal Family
Page 10 of 82
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15
posted on 5/3/21
You can spot the racists who are trying to incite hatred as is the leftist way. Constantinople, Barry and the same old faces. The only ones who ever bring up skin colour
posted on 5/3/21
I remember at school we had a "skin colour" Crayola crayon. Anyone remember that?
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can spot the racists who are trying to incite hatred as is the leftist way. Constantinople, Barry and the same old faces. The only ones who ever bring up skin colour
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Could you please stop talking about skin colour
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 14 seconds ago
I remember at school we had a "skin colour" Crayola crayon. Anyone remember that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 5/3/21
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed. It’s so typical online and in modern times to have your views challenged with logic and reason only to reply with ad hominem & abuse to only get further detailed points completely refuting their point of view only to ignore it completely, stop replying and continue to think as they did before.
Like I said, ideologically possessed.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 3 minutes ago
You can spot the racists who are trying to incite hatred as is the leftist way. Constantinople, Barry and the same old faces. The only ones who ever bring up skin colour
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow.
All we want is to take ARE country back from the foreigns.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t ignored any of his message. And I’ve made one passing reference to the media, and given a concrete example - with a citation - of the way in which the Royal’s are an extension of rapacious power, and how that *never* gets reported. And yet, ironically, Sat Nav thinks my opposition to the Royals is because of a hostile media that I’ve fallen for (despite the media not being hostile to the Royals in any meaningful way, not reporting on the important example I cited).
So I went down no such rabbit hole. It’s amazing how much people can’t seem to read & understand stuff that isn’t very complicated to grasp.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
You can have a look around the palace if you like.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve actually no idea whether you can or can’t in that instance, but you get my point, right? The Royals *themselves* are not the tourist attraction - nobody gets to see them, just as nobody gets to meet a King or Ruler at Peterhof’s Palace.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're being silly now. No one would care if it wasn't a royal residence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as nobody cares at the example I gave? Looks like I’m not the one being silly! If you’re arguing nobody would turn up to ex-Royal buildings, may I suggest you visit some abroad and discover for yourself how wrong you are?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex royal buildings. Right. Which in itself makes my point. The fact they're royals is the draw. We're agreed on that.
So what's the benefit of making them ex royals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry but if you don’t already know the main arguments against the existence of a Royal Family, you’ll have to go and research it yourself. It’s way, way too long of an essay for me to do on my phone at 10pm on a Friday! 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough. I'm just curious of what you thought, because I don't see there being a huge upside, personally.
The land and assets would go to the State I guess, who’d likely share it amongst the powerful elite and their shell companies. Nothing would change for the average person.
I think 99% of the arguments are because of the bad press they get (completely valid), some sort of moral objection (I don't agree but ok), and the assumption that the alternative is better (completely misplaced IMO).
The actual monetary thing, I don't think there's a solid argument for. Not one I've seen anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most the press are slavishly pro-Royal. The odd scandal that hits the news benefits the press in terms of hits but the real scandals - the ones never reported - are for example things like the Royal Prerogative, whereby the Queen is used a political ‘get out of jail’ card for the state when the state has gotten itself into hot water. For example the invocation of the Royal Prerogative to deny the Chagossians the right of return to Diego Garcia after they won their case in the High Court. See: http://johnpilger.com/videos/stealing-a-nation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Guardian certainly isn't pro monarch and wants it abolished. Now I love the Guardian and have read it since it was The Manchester Guardian, but I disagree with them on this.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems that you're uninformed/deluded about how the royal family is funded at your expense. Guess it would seem like just a bit of fun if that's where your knowledge ends
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe I am far less deluded than you. The cost per head is minimal, and offset by tourist income. Saying we should make them into a celebrity family on Netflix is ludicrous.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The cost per head for almost anything would be minimal if there's 60m heads. They are a celebrity family already, all I'm suggesting is those that are interested in them pay for them. I wouldn't mind paying for them if they were on UBI and struggling to find work btw, that isn't unreasonable
posted on 5/3/21
No one has mentioned the main important role of the royal that keeps them relevant; to help prop up dictators around the world.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t ignored any of his message. And I’ve made one passing reference to the media, and given a concrete example - with a citation - of the way in which the Royal’s are an extension of rapacious power, and how that *never* gets reported. And yet, ironically, Sat Nav thinks my opposition to the Royals is because of a hostile media that I’ve fallen for (despite the media not being hostile to the Royals in any meaningful way, not reporting on the important example I cited).
So I went down no such rabbit hole. It’s amazing how much people can’t seem to read & understand stuff that isn’t very complicated to grasp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Looked to me like you picked the one bit of the message you could use to make your point and just ignored all the bits that went against the set idea you have in your head.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 1 second ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 39 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 30 seconds ago
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
Look, boy meets girl, gets married, they decide they want to be together and not experience all the drama their family brings. The end. FFS move on, nobody cares, let them be.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How naive. One day you will learn that things are not this black and white. Or more specifically, not white, like Meghan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another racist. Why are you trying to bring race into it Barry? Dress it up as comedy all you want but you havent been funny for years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think Barry is being racist, you're thick. He's the opposite of racist, he's laughing at racists and they're so stupid they think he's on their side.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So why is he mentioning colour? It's incitment. I know all about Barry. He was funny in 2012.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think this place started in 2011 so that's a whole year to be fair. You had your time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancel culture trying to get Barry.
I thought his mob were against cancel culture.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 1 minute ago
No one has mentioned the main important role of the royal that keeps them relevant; to help prop up dictators around the world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like the 'royal' Meg wearing earrings gifted from the vile murderous Saudi prince
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
We're Schit and we will tell everyone about how Schit the UK is.....how very droll.
It's been done to death, comrades and republicans.
Whinging p0ms ring any bells.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whinging P0M's is a reference to P0M's whinging about :" Oh its not like home." "Why can't they all just speak English" "We don't do it like that in Britain."
More a British Chauvinist than one who runs Britain down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Point taken.....you've ruined it now, mate.haha
It does get boring hearing folk put themselves and each other down daily, but it is a terribly English left wing trait, so jolly hockey sticks, wot wot, keep on self-hating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another odd comment. In my reply to you earlier I praised the British public for its successful defiance of injustices from abolition through to LGBT issues, all of which have and continue to contribute to a progressive & liberal & civilised society by international standards.
What you perceive as ‘self loathing’ is simply opposition to policies that cause harm that you simply don’t care to know about or actively support. That’s a problem that *you* have, not the people who want to try to make things better for others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which policies you speak of cause harm? And what would your answer be to them? As your beloved leader doesn't seem to have any answers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which “beloved leader” are you referring to?
Crikey, how do I even need to answer that question? Let’s take Britain’s policy of arming, supplying maintenance & loading services & operational control room assistance, training of fighter pilots & parliamentary cover for a state driving the world’s leading humanitarian disaster in Yemen. Or arming the majority of states on its own human rights abusers list. Or a decade of politically driven austerity. Or the invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq, the destruction of Libya based on lies. The completely botched handling of pandemic & outright corruption in profiteering from it. These are all policies that successive governments (Labour or Tory), have & continue to engage in, with predicted consequences. And I’m barely scratching the surface.
Opposing such things is not “self loathing”, as BlueBalls thinks. It’s the stance that any sane, compassionate & informed person should take on these and other issues.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 8 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok and how much do they bring in again? Oh yeah hundreds of millions of pounds.
This is a simple diagram for you
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/secondary/Royal-tax-latest-news-crown-estate-news-royal-family-finances-2564559.jpg?r=tel:1594563000027
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I or you owned a huge oil field (for instance) by birthright we could rake in billions. Take what we see fit then give some back to the peasants who've paid for all the oil in the first place...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring in hundreds of millions every year, every year. And cost us hundreds of millions less. Hence profits to the ‘peasants’ of hundreds of millions a year.
Jesus Christ.
What harm does having a monarchy in the 21st century cause us? Please tell me, anyone??
Honestly it just boils down to clichéd flawed opinions based on poor media consumption.
The Windsors as a family are a bunch of morons on the whole and the Queen does do a lot for charity but as individuals they don’t have much of my respect and I don’t laud them but having a monarchy which is steeped in centuries and centuries of history and tradition in this country and the pride & pleasure that it brings most people in this country and millions around the world is undeniable.
If Liverpool say replaced YWNWA with the latest One Direction song because tradition is just for the brain-dead; how would that go down? Not very well I’m sure.
Tradition means something, history means something. Be proud that we have history and traditions like most other fking countries. Cup of tea, queen of England, fish and chips, queuing et cetera. They’re all pretty meaningless things, they’re not life and death matters but bloody hell what harm do they cause? Stop being such miserable fk fcks and enjoy some history ffs.
😂😂😂😂
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems that you're uninformed/deluded about how the royal family is funded at your expense. Guess it would seem like just a bit of fun if that's where your knowledge ends
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tell us how they’re funded please
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This gives some details if that's helpful https://www.statista.com/chart/18569/total-cost-of-the-uks-royal-family-by-year/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So about £6 per month if that's the figure at the top.
posted on 5/3/21
Their trying too cancel Barry cos people are offended about it being racist in cockney rhyming slang.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 8 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok and how much do they bring in again? Oh yeah hundreds of millions of pounds.
This is a simple diagram for you
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/secondary/Royal-tax-latest-news-crown-estate-news-royal-family-finances-2564559.jpg?r=tel:1594563000027
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I or you owned a huge oil field (for instance) by birthright we could rake in billions. Take what we see fit then give some back to the peasants who've paid for all the oil in the first place...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring in hundreds of millions every year, every year. And cost us hundreds of millions less. Hence profits to the ‘peasants’ of hundreds of millions a year.
Jesus Christ.
What harm does having a monarchy in the 21st century cause us? Please tell me, anyone??
Honestly it just boils down to clichéd flawed opinions based on poor media consumption.
The Windsors as a family are a bunch of morons on the whole and the Queen does do a lot for charity but as individuals they don’t have much of my respect and I don’t laud them but having a monarchy which is steeped in centuries and centuries of history and tradition in this country and the pride & pleasure that it brings most people in this country and millions around the world is undeniable.
If Liverpool say replaced YWNWA with the latest One Direction song because tradition is just for the brain-dead; how would that go down? Not very well I’m sure.
Tradition means something, history means something. Be proud that we have history and traditions like most other fking countries. Cup of tea, queen of England, fish and chips, queuing et cetera. They’re all pretty meaningless things, they’re not life and death matters but bloody hell what harm do they cause? Stop being such miserable fk fcks and enjoy some history ffs.
😂😂😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess traditionally you could behead them and take over, not a bad shout
posted on 5/3/21
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
We're Schit and we will tell everyone about how Schit the UK is.....how very droll.
It's been done to death, comrades and republicans.
Whinging p0ms ring any bells.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whinging P0M's is a reference to P0M's whinging about :" Oh its not like home." "Why can't they all just speak English" "We don't do it like that in Britain."
More a British Chauvinist than one who runs Britain down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Point taken.....you've ruined it now, mate.haha
It does get boring hearing folk put themselves and each other down daily, but it is a terribly English left wing trait, so jolly hockey sticks, wot wot, keep on self-hating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another odd comment. In my reply to you earlier I praised the British public for its successful defiance of injustices from abolition through to LGBT issues, all of which have and continue to contribute to a progressive & liberal & civilised society by international standards.
What you perceive as ‘self loathing’ is simply opposition to policies that cause harm that you simply don’t care to know about or actively support. That’s a problem that *you* have, not the people who want to try to make things better for others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which policies you speak of cause harm? And what would your answer be to them? As your beloved leader doesn't seem to have any answers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which “beloved leader” are you referring to?
Crikey, how do I even need to answer that question? Let’s take Britain’s policy of arming, supplying maintenance & loading services & operational control room assistance, training of fighter pilots & parliamentary cover for a state driving the world’s leading humanitarian disaster in Yemen. Or arming the majority of states on its own human rights abusers list. Or a decade of politically driven austerity. Or the invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq, the destruction of Libya based on lies. The completely botched handling of pandemic & outright corruption in profiteering from it. These are all policies that successive governments (Labour or Tory), have & continue to engage in, with predicted consequences. And I’m barely scratching the surface.
Opposing such things is not “self loathing”, as BlueBalls thinks. It’s the stance that any sane, compassionate & informed person should take on these and other issues.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So Labour would have handled the pandemic better? Speaking of human rights abuse I see it every day under khan's london
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 8 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok and how much do they bring in again? Oh yeah hundreds of millions of pounds.
This is a simple diagram for you
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/secondary/Royal-tax-latest-news-crown-estate-news-royal-family-finances-2564559.jpg?r=tel:1594563000027
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I or you owned a huge oil field (for instance) by birthright we could rake in billions. Take what we see fit then give some back to the peasants who've paid for all the oil in the first place...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring in hundreds of millions every year, every year. And cost us hundreds of millions less. Hence profits to the ‘peasants’ of hundreds of millions a year.
Jesus Christ.
What harm does having a monarchy in the 21st century cause us? Please tell me, anyone??
Honestly it just boils down to clichéd flawed opinions based on poor media consumption.
The Windsors as a family are a bunch of morons on the whole and the Queen does do a lot for charity but as individuals they don’t have much of my respect and I don’t laud them but having a monarchy which is steeped in centuries and centuries of history and tradition in this country and the pride & pleasure that it brings most people in this country and millions around the world is undeniable.
If Liverpool say replaced YWNWA with the latest One Direction song because tradition is just for the brain-dead; how would that go down? Not very well I’m sure.
Tradition means something, history means something. Be proud that we have history and traditions like most other fking countries. Cup of tea, queen of England, fish and chips, queuing et cetera. They’re all pretty meaningless things, they’re not life and death matters but bloody hell what harm do they cause? Stop being such miserable fk fcks and enjoy some history ffs.
😂😂😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can have history without a servile attitude to a family that hit jackpot in the birth lottery.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t ignored any of his message. And I’ve made one passing reference to the media, and given a concrete example - with a citation - of the way in which the Royal’s are an extension of rapacious power, and how that *never* gets reported. And yet, ironically, Sat Nav thinks my opposition to the Royals is because of a hostile media that I’ve fallen for (despite the media not being hostile to the Royals in any meaningful way, not reporting on the important example I cited).
So I went down no such rabbit hole. It’s amazing how much people can’t seem to read & understand stuff that isn’t very complicated to grasp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well try to help me grasp this then oh enlightened one:
What harm does the monarchy cause us?
Citing a story about the monarchs and concluding that the press is completely pro-monarchy (which isn’t a surprise given that the majority of the country is) doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.
How many articles have been in the press about how much they ‘cost’ the taxpayer? When in reality they bring in far more than they cost.
The Diana stories were hardly purely pro-monarchy
This current story is very divided with most siding with Harry & Meghan.
posted on 5/3/21
So Labour would have handled the pandemic better? Speaking of human rights abuse I see it every day under khan's london
___________
This should be interesting
posted on 5/3/21
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he doesn’t have sound reasoning behind his opinion. He’s just suffered from decades of media-bashing to make his mind up for him. Yet we’re brain-dead apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can tell there's not much of a worthwhile discussion to be had when he ignores most of Bales message and goes down a rabbit hole of something that ultimately doesn't matter (how they're portrayed in the media)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t ignored any of his message. And I’ve made one passing reference to the media, and given a concrete example - with a citation - of the way in which the Royal’s are an extension of rapacious power, and how that *never* gets reported. And yet, ironically, Sat Nav thinks my opposition to the Royals is because of a hostile media that I’ve fallen for (despite the media not being hostile to the Royals in any meaningful way, not reporting on the important example I cited).
So I went down no such rabbit hole. It’s amazing how much people can’t seem to read & understand stuff that isn’t very complicated to grasp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Looked to me like you picked the one bit of the message you could use to make your point and just ignored all the bits that went against the set idea you have in your head.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I used that part because it neatly segued into starting to answer his previous post about why/what my opposition to the RF was based on. As I said - would require some seriously long replies in the main, but I could at least offer one very serious example that virtually nobody knows about precisely because it *doesn’t get reported*. Remember that for context, on more than one occasion I’d been accused of opposing the Royals because of what the media say. So I was killing two birds with one stone. A) here’s an important reason (royal prerogative/Diego Garcia) & b) given it not reported at all, it can’t be because of the media.
Clear enough?
posted on 5/3/21
comment by The Post Nearly Man. 20times, 20legend (U1270)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 1 second ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 39 seconds ago
comment by Tomkins (U1116)
posted 30 seconds ago
comment by Osman Sow (U1734)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
Look, boy meets girl, gets married, they decide they want to be together and not experience all the drama their family brings. The end. FFS move on, nobody cares, let them be.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How naive. One day you will learn that things are not this black and white. Or more specifically, not white, like Meghan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another racist. Why are you trying to bring race into it Barry? Dress it up as comedy all you want but you havent been funny for years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think Barry is being racist, you're thick. He's the opposite of racist, he's laughing at racists and they're so stupid they think he's on their side.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So why is he mentioning colour? It's incitment. I know all about Barry. He was funny in 2012.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think this place started in 2011 so that's a whole year to be fair. You had your time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancel culture trying to get Barry.
I thought his mob were against cancel culture.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are, that's why the Royal Family are still of importance. But also we should remember the decorated men who took Britain around the world and pillaged countries and took their natives as slaves.
FFS people you can still be proud of your country and accept it had blame in the past.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by TBaggerin (U11806)
posted 39 seconds ago
So Labour would have handled the pandemic better? Speaking of human rights abuse I see it every day under khan's london
___________
This should be interesting
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's the classic straw man argument.
You can't criticise this because that would have been worse.
Honestly, identity politics is all the right have these days.
Page 10 of 82
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15