comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by RED666👺 The Influencer (U6562)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 6 minutes ago
Going back to the OP, countries can be happy and successful with or without a monarchy. So why not keep ours? I would be happy to emulate the Nordic countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're a drain on a struggling society. They're one of the only things worth privatising, take all their land, power and real estate away then let them earn some money from tv deals. They'll do absolutely fine but the weirdos who love them will be the ones paying for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weird why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't escape the weirdness right now ffs. The hysteria over a 96 year old woman dying after living a great life is utterly mental
The media over here in Oz have been playing royal carp non stop since the news broke on every major channel. Can't imagine the level of cringeworthy shiiite going on in the UK right now
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What you call hysteria is going on around the world.
The fact that you cannot understand it or why makes you in the minority and just a little wierd
comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 47 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 6 minutes ago
Going back to the OP, countries can be happy and successful with or without a monarchy. So why not keep ours? I would be happy to emulate the Nordic countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're a drain on a struggling society. They're one of the only things worth privatising, take all their land, power and real estate away then let them earn some money from tv deals. They'll do absolutely fine but the weirdos who love them will be the ones paying for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So 60% of the population are weirdos? I rather think the other way. They don't have any power. They aren't a financial drain.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As someone else mentioned, what would those same supporters of the royal family say if someone else announced themselves as the one true royals?
Just because something is normalised/drummed in from an early age doesn't make it not fecking strange and in fact a negative
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe many don't think it's a negative
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
comment by Boy From The South (U3979)
posted 43 seconds ago
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You could well be right bfts.
It similar to an argument about religion sadly
I think we have to redefine hysteria.
Meanwhile, as part of this hysteria the President of the 5th Republic of France made a calm and respectful address to the British nation a couple of days ago, in which he stated that although the rest of the World are aware that the British are lamenting the loss of THEIR Queen, the rest of the World (certainly in France anyway) are also lamenting the loss of THE Queen.
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Rosso out here drippin’ in finesse (U17054)
posted 18 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 47 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 6 minutes ago
Going back to the OP, countries can be happy and successful with or without a monarchy. So why not keep ours? I would be happy to emulate the Nordic countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're a drain on a struggling society. They're one of the only things worth privatising, take all their land, power and real estate away then let them earn some money from tv deals. They'll do absolutely fine but the weirdos who love them will be the ones paying for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So 60% of the population are weirdos? I rather think the other way. They don't have any power. They aren't a financial drain.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you think Charles will be making a voluntary tax payment in respect of the close to half a billion quid’s worth of personal private wealth he’s about to inherit?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't really care. My view is if you have a royal family they need to be kept in a royal manner. People expect palaces, banquets, gold coaches and all the rigmarole.
It's no good having a monarchy living in a three bed semi in Barking.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We're talking about the queen's *private* wealth; not the likes of Buckingham Palace, the royal coaches, or other assets, fixed or otherwise, of the Crown Estates (which the royals don't own - we do).
The queen was a (rent-free) tenant of Buckingham Palace, not the owner.
Her private wealth wasn't paying for her public life. We pay for the royals' banquets, the overseas trips (until the locals boot them out), the military parades, the security, the rest of the pageantry.
None of that has anything to do with her private wealth.
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RED666👺 The Influencer (U6562)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 25 seconds ago
People would still visit without them. Indeed if you opened up the palaces etc that would get more people to see and spend.
My main issue with them has always been that it's a bit ridiculous they're classed as 'better' people than us just because of the family they're born into. If I ever met any of them I'd treat them with the same respect as anyone else. There'd certainly be no airs and graces. Where I work some colleagues won't speak with the cleaners whereas I think some of the most interesting chats come with them. We're all people and all hold the same worth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You seen the story where she was out walking with a game keeper and bumped into a couple of yanks that didn’t recognise her? Very funny and shows what type of person she was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She could have very well been a nice person. Or a horrible one. We don't really know. It still is a bit odd IMO that anyone is put on a pedestal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What, even SAF?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fergie is different.
He gave me some of the best moments of my life. He worked hard to get to the position he got to. He was there on merit. The King/Queen gets that position just because they're born into a certain family.
They're also different to celebrities too. The public can pretty much cancel celebrity overnight. Bad and good things can be said about them. The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
It's like the emperor's new clothes ... eventually everyone will come to see how silly it all is.
comment by Boy From The South (U3979)
posted 13 minutes ago
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If your mind is made up based on an emotional attachment to tradition and ceremony, then there's no logical argument - whether about democracy, transparency and agency; fairness, equity and universal rights; economics; or diplomacy - that's going to make any difference, is there?
I'll also add that it's crazy that the Queen's family have to be out and about just days after the death of their Mother, Grandmother etc. Like every other person they should be allowed to grieve in private. It's not our grief to share. Some people on my social media have gone OTT with grief. They commemorated people they knew less than this. People who actually did something in their lives.
Its quite ridiculous to suggest that nepotism isn't rife in all sectors of industry and entertainment in the UK.
Are we saying that celebrities kids should be stripped of everything that has been handed to them, and that they must be thrown out into the wilderness to fend for themselves?
———
Still persisting with this facking stupid argument.
comment by Rosso out here drippin’ in finesse (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Boy From The South (U3979)
posted 13 minutes ago
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If your mind is made up based on an emotional attachment to tradition and ceremony, then there's no logical argument - whether about democracy, transparency and agency; fairness, equity and universal rights; economics; or diplomacy - that's going to make any difference, is there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct. But if it is made up including the standing it gives us in the world at minimal cost I think. The fact that it is a democratic monarchy according to polls. Fairness, equality, tish and tush, as if we will have either of those without them. Then and a good proportion of people are for it.
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Rosso out here drippin’ in finesse (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Boy From The South (U3979)
posted 13 minutes ago
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If your mind is made up based on an emotional attachment to tradition and ceremony, then there's no logical argument - whether about democracy, transparency and agency; fairness, equity and universal rights; economics; or diplomacy - that's going to make any difference, is there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct. But if it is made up including the standing it gives us in the world at minimal cost I think. The fact that it is a democratic monarchy according to polls. Fairness, equality, tish and tush, as if we will have either of those without them. Then and a good proportion of people are for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't remotely believe that the British monarchy adds in any way to the UK's standing in the world. NZ will become a republic within a generation, Australia has a republican PM, the people of the British West Indies told Wills and Kate *very* clearly what they think of the institution during their visit, and the likes of Jamaica and Antigua will be following Barbados in ridding themselves of colonial control in the near future.
People of the colonial world are still shouting for their independence, and for justice and reparation, and thankfully, there are now more people in the developed world ready to listen to them and prepared to read up on their history, rather than accepting the whitewashed bullshiiiiit narrative they've been fed their entire lives to disguise the despicable crimes of Empire.
I really cannot be bothered coming back around to the rest of the points, and have work to do. We shall have to agree to (completely) disagree I think mu52.
Generally-speaking, the developed world is slowly ridding itself of monarchies as it trudges in the direction of democracy; you don't see new ones popping up. It's a good thing, and it'll inevitably happen at some point in the UK.
I bear no personal ill will to the Windsors - you could replace them with anyone and I wouldn't feel any differently; but I very much hope they are deposed in my lifetime. And when it happens I shall do a little dance in the name of progress.
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 17 minutes ago
Are we saying that celebrities kids should be stripped of everything that has been handed to them, and that they must be thrown out into the wilderness to fend for themselves?
———
Still persisting with this facking stupid argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Darren, go have a read of some of these comments on this article.
Along the lines of
"It's not fair that they're born into wealth"
"They haven't done anything to deserve what they own"
Its a ridiculous argument this. The majority of people in the UK still want the Constitutional Monarchy. Its about 64% in favour I believe. So if there was a referendum then the Royalists would easily win it. (Its not a 48/52 thing).
And you think that is the same as a family that were born into the most ridiculous of privilege and are funded by the public?
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RED666👺 The Influencer (U6562)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 25 seconds ago
People would still visit without them. Indeed if you opened up the palaces etc that would get more people to see and spend.
My main issue with them has always been that it's a bit ridiculous they're classed as 'better' people than us just because of the family they're born into. If I ever met any of them I'd treat them with the same respect as anyone else. There'd certainly be no airs and graces. Where I work some colleagues won't speak with the cleaners whereas I think some of the most interesting chats come with them. We're all people and all hold the same worth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You seen the story where she was out walking with a game keeper and bumped into a couple of yanks that didn’t recognise her? Very funny and shows what type of person she was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She could have very well been a nice person. Or a horrible one. We don't really know. It still is a bit odd IMO that anyone is put on a pedestal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What, even SAF?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fergie is different.
He gave me some of the best moments of my life. He worked hard to get to the position he got to. He was there on merit. The King/Queen gets that position just because they're born into a certain family.
They're also different to celebrities too. The public can pretty much cancel celebrity overnight. Bad and good things can be said about them. The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fergie was a football manager.
When he dies, a sad that day that'll be, I look forward to the balanced coverage that you will provide ensuring that everybody remembers how aggressive and bitter he could be.
Don't think Darren Ferguson would have got a game for Man United if his Dad wasn't the manager
comment by GregUnited (U1192)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 17 minutes ago
Are we saying that celebrities kids should be stripped of everything that has been handed to them, and that they must be thrown out into the wilderness to fend for themselves?
———
Still persisting with this facking stupid argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Darren, go have a read of some of these comments on this article.
Along the lines of
"It's not fair that they're born into wealth"
"They haven't done anything to deserve what they own"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just because there are a couple of crossovers, it doesn't mean the comparison is wholly sound. The monarchy is a single institution, of which some are arguing for the abolition. 'Celebrity' is a much more nebulous thing. David Beckham made his money the way many others do; he just made more of it - along what lines would someone take it off his children?
The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
---
Why would any want to cast a critical eye on the royal family as soon as the queen dies?!
The critical eye will probably happen at some point in the future.
comment by GregUnited (U1192)
posted 1 minute ago
The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
---
Why would any want to cast a critical eye on the royal family as soon as the queen dies?!
The critical eye will probably happen at some point in the future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As good a time as any.
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 1 second ago
comment by GregUnited (U1192)
posted 1 minute ago
The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
---
Why would any want to cast a critical eye on the royal family as soon as the queen dies?!
The critical eye will probably happen at some point in the future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As good a time as any.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Only if you're an abhorrent human being.
I can't stand Fergie, but when he goes I certainly won't be using that as an opportunity to be critical of him as a person. It's disrespectful.
She's not even in the ground ffs.
comment by Clockwork Red: Jadon and the Argonauts (U4892)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GregUnited (U1192)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 17 minutes ago
Are we saying that celebrities kids should be stripped of everything that has been handed to them, and that they must be thrown out into the wilderness to fend for themselves?
———
Still persisting with this facking stupid argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Darren, go have a read of some of these comments on this article.
Along the lines of
"It's not fair that they're born into wealth"
"They haven't done anything to deserve what they own"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just because there are a couple of crossovers, it doesn't mean the comparison is wholly sound. The monarchy is a single institution, of which some are arguing for the abolition. 'Celebrity' is a much more nebulous thing. David Beckham made his money the way many others do; he just made more of it - along what lines would someone take it off his children?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I never said they were an exact match but there are similarities.
I never said take money off his kids either. Specifically said comments to be made on his family 1000 years down the line (if they're still rich) because they didn't earn it themselves.
I can picture it now, if a Beckham in 1000 years is sitting atop a castle somewhere and someone goes "the feck has this cant done to deserve this? He's done nothing but live off his ancestors for a thousand years, and his dad was only focking good at curling a bag of leather. Why the feck did he get rich from that anyway?!"
Sign in if you want to comment
The constitution
Page 12 of 21
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17
posted on 12/9/22
comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by RED666👺 The Influencer (U6562)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 6 minutes ago
Going back to the OP, countries can be happy and successful with or without a monarchy. So why not keep ours? I would be happy to emulate the Nordic countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're a drain on a struggling society. They're one of the only things worth privatising, take all their land, power and real estate away then let them earn some money from tv deals. They'll do absolutely fine but the weirdos who love them will be the ones paying for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weird why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't escape the weirdness right now ffs. The hysteria over a 96 year old woman dying after living a great life is utterly mental
The media over here in Oz have been playing royal carp non stop since the news broke on every major channel. Can't imagine the level of cringeworthy shiiite going on in the UK right now
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What you call hysteria is going on around the world.
The fact that you cannot understand it or why makes you in the minority and just a little wierd
posted on 12/9/22
comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 47 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 6 minutes ago
Going back to the OP, countries can be happy and successful with or without a monarchy. So why not keep ours? I would be happy to emulate the Nordic countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're a drain on a struggling society. They're one of the only things worth privatising, take all their land, power and real estate away then let them earn some money from tv deals. They'll do absolutely fine but the weirdos who love them will be the ones paying for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So 60% of the population are weirdos? I rather think the other way. They don't have any power. They aren't a financial drain.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As someone else mentioned, what would those same supporters of the royal family say if someone else announced themselves as the one true royals?
Just because something is normalised/drummed in from an early age doesn't make it not fecking strange and in fact a negative
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe many don't think it's a negative
posted on 12/9/22
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by Boy From The South (U3979)
posted 43 seconds ago
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You could well be right bfts.
posted on 12/9/22
It similar to an argument about religion sadly
posted on 12/9/22
I think we have to redefine hysteria.
Meanwhile, as part of this hysteria the President of the 5th Republic of France made a calm and respectful address to the British nation a couple of days ago, in which he stated that although the rest of the World are aware that the British are lamenting the loss of THEIR Queen, the rest of the World (certainly in France anyway) are also lamenting the loss of THE Queen.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Rosso out here drippin’ in finesse (U17054)
posted 18 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Two Balls, One Saka (U19684)
posted 47 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 6 minutes ago
Going back to the OP, countries can be happy and successful with or without a monarchy. So why not keep ours? I would be happy to emulate the Nordic countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're a drain on a struggling society. They're one of the only things worth privatising, take all their land, power and real estate away then let them earn some money from tv deals. They'll do absolutely fine but the weirdos who love them will be the ones paying for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So 60% of the population are weirdos? I rather think the other way. They don't have any power. They aren't a financial drain.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you think Charles will be making a voluntary tax payment in respect of the close to half a billion quid’s worth of personal private wealth he’s about to inherit?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't really care. My view is if you have a royal family they need to be kept in a royal manner. People expect palaces, banquets, gold coaches and all the rigmarole.
It's no good having a monarchy living in a three bed semi in Barking.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We're talking about the queen's *private* wealth; not the likes of Buckingham Palace, the royal coaches, or other assets, fixed or otherwise, of the Crown Estates (which the royals don't own - we do).
The queen was a (rent-free) tenant of Buckingham Palace, not the owner.
Her private wealth wasn't paying for her public life. We pay for the royals' banquets, the overseas trips (until the locals boot them out), the military parades, the security, the rest of the pageantry.
None of that has anything to do with her private wealth.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RED666👺 The Influencer (U6562)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 25 seconds ago
People would still visit without them. Indeed if you opened up the palaces etc that would get more people to see and spend.
My main issue with them has always been that it's a bit ridiculous they're classed as 'better' people than us just because of the family they're born into. If I ever met any of them I'd treat them with the same respect as anyone else. There'd certainly be no airs and graces. Where I work some colleagues won't speak with the cleaners whereas I think some of the most interesting chats come with them. We're all people and all hold the same worth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You seen the story where she was out walking with a game keeper and bumped into a couple of yanks that didn’t recognise her? Very funny and shows what type of person she was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She could have very well been a nice person. Or a horrible one. We don't really know. It still is a bit odd IMO that anyone is put on a pedestal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What, even SAF?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fergie is different.
He gave me some of the best moments of my life. He worked hard to get to the position he got to. He was there on merit. The King/Queen gets that position just because they're born into a certain family.
They're also different to celebrities too. The public can pretty much cancel celebrity overnight. Bad and good things can be said about them. The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
posted on 12/9/22
It's like the emperor's new clothes ... eventually everyone will come to see how silly it all is.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by Boy From The South (U3979)
posted 13 minutes ago
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If your mind is made up based on an emotional attachment to tradition and ceremony, then there's no logical argument - whether about democracy, transparency and agency; fairness, equity and universal rights; economics; or diplomacy - that's going to make any difference, is there?
posted on 12/9/22
I'll also add that it's crazy that the Queen's family have to be out and about just days after the death of their Mother, Grandmother etc. Like every other person they should be allowed to grieve in private. It's not our grief to share. Some people on my social media have gone OTT with grief. They commemorated people they knew less than this. People who actually did something in their lives.
posted on 12/9/22
Its quite ridiculous to suggest that nepotism isn't rife in all sectors of industry and entertainment in the UK.
posted on 12/9/22
Are we saying that celebrities kids should be stripped of everything that has been handed to them, and that they must be thrown out into the wilderness to fend for themselves?
———
Still persisting with this facking stupid argument.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by Rosso out here drippin’ in finesse (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Boy From The South (U3979)
posted 13 minutes ago
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If your mind is made up based on an emotional attachment to tradition and ceremony, then there's no logical argument - whether about democracy, transparency and agency; fairness, equity and universal rights; economics; or diplomacy - that's going to make any difference, is there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct. But if it is made up including the standing it gives us in the world at minimal cost I think. The fact that it is a democratic monarchy according to polls. Fairness, equality, tish and tush, as if we will have either of those without them. Then and a good proportion of people are for it.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Rosso out here drippin’ in finesse (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Boy From The South (U3979)
posted 13 minutes ago
mu52
Gallant attempt, but you're not changing any minds here, I'd like the abolitionists discuss amongst themselves tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If your mind is made up based on an emotional attachment to tradition and ceremony, then there's no logical argument - whether about democracy, transparency and agency; fairness, equity and universal rights; economics; or diplomacy - that's going to make any difference, is there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct. But if it is made up including the standing it gives us in the world at minimal cost I think. The fact that it is a democratic monarchy according to polls. Fairness, equality, tish and tush, as if we will have either of those without them. Then and a good proportion of people are for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't remotely believe that the British monarchy adds in any way to the UK's standing in the world. NZ will become a republic within a generation, Australia has a republican PM, the people of the British West Indies told Wills and Kate *very* clearly what they think of the institution during their visit, and the likes of Jamaica and Antigua will be following Barbados in ridding themselves of colonial control in the near future.
People of the colonial world are still shouting for their independence, and for justice and reparation, and thankfully, there are now more people in the developed world ready to listen to them and prepared to read up on their history, rather than accepting the whitewashed bullshiiiiit narrative they've been fed their entire lives to disguise the despicable crimes of Empire.
I really cannot be bothered coming back around to the rest of the points, and have work to do. We shall have to agree to (completely) disagree I think mu52.
Generally-speaking, the developed world is slowly ridding itself of monarchies as it trudges in the direction of democracy; you don't see new ones popping up. It's a good thing, and it'll inevitably happen at some point in the UK.
I bear no personal ill will to the Windsors - you could replace them with anyone and I wouldn't feel any differently; but I very much hope they are deposed in my lifetime. And when it happens I shall do a little dance in the name of progress.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 17 minutes ago
Are we saying that celebrities kids should be stripped of everything that has been handed to them, and that they must be thrown out into the wilderness to fend for themselves?
———
Still persisting with this facking stupid argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Darren, go have a read of some of these comments on this article.
Along the lines of
"It's not fair that they're born into wealth"
"They haven't done anything to deserve what they own"
posted on 12/9/22
Its a ridiculous argument this. The majority of people in the UK still want the Constitutional Monarchy. Its about 64% in favour I believe. So if there was a referendum then the Royalists would easily win it. (Its not a 48/52 thing).
posted on 12/9/22
And you think that is the same as a family that were born into the most ridiculous of privilege and are funded by the public?
posted on 12/9/22
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RED666👺 The Influencer (U6562)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 25 seconds ago
People would still visit without them. Indeed if you opened up the palaces etc that would get more people to see and spend.
My main issue with them has always been that it's a bit ridiculous they're classed as 'better' people than us just because of the family they're born into. If I ever met any of them I'd treat them with the same respect as anyone else. There'd certainly be no airs and graces. Where I work some colleagues won't speak with the cleaners whereas I think some of the most interesting chats come with them. We're all people and all hold the same worth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You seen the story where she was out walking with a game keeper and bumped into a couple of yanks that didn’t recognise her? Very funny and shows what type of person she was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She could have very well been a nice person. Or a horrible one. We don't really know. It still is a bit odd IMO that anyone is put on a pedestal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What, even SAF?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fergie is different.
He gave me some of the best moments of my life. He worked hard to get to the position he got to. He was there on merit. The King/Queen gets that position just because they're born into a certain family.
They're also different to celebrities too. The public can pretty much cancel celebrity overnight. Bad and good things can be said about them. The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fergie was a football manager.
When he dies, a sad that day that'll be, I look forward to the balanced coverage that you will provide ensuring that everybody remembers how aggressive and bitter he could be.
posted on 12/9/22
Don't think Darren Ferguson would have got a game for Man United if his Dad wasn't the manager
posted on 12/9/22
comment by GregUnited (U1192)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 17 minutes ago
Are we saying that celebrities kids should be stripped of everything that has been handed to them, and that they must be thrown out into the wilderness to fend for themselves?
———
Still persisting with this facking stupid argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Darren, go have a read of some of these comments on this article.
Along the lines of
"It's not fair that they're born into wealth"
"They haven't done anything to deserve what they own"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just because there are a couple of crossovers, it doesn't mean the comparison is wholly sound. The monarchy is a single institution, of which some are arguing for the abolition. 'Celebrity' is a much more nebulous thing. David Beckham made his money the way many others do; he just made more of it - along what lines would someone take it off his children?
posted on 12/9/22
The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
---
Why would any want to cast a critical eye on the royal family as soon as the queen dies?!
The critical eye will probably happen at some point in the future.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by GregUnited (U1192)
posted 1 minute ago
The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
---
Why would any want to cast a critical eye on the royal family as soon as the queen dies?!
The critical eye will probably happen at some point in the future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As good a time as any.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 1 second ago
comment by GregUnited (U1192)
posted 1 minute ago
The Queen's death has only been constant 'feel good' stories with not much of a critical eye cast.
---
Why would any want to cast a critical eye on the royal family as soon as the queen dies?!
The critical eye will probably happen at some point in the future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As good a time as any.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Only if you're an abhorrent human being.
I can't stand Fergie, but when he goes I certainly won't be using that as an opportunity to be critical of him as a person. It's disrespectful.
She's not even in the ground ffs.
posted on 12/9/22
comment by Clockwork Red: Jadon and the Argonauts (U4892)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GregUnited (U1192)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 17 minutes ago
Are we saying that celebrities kids should be stripped of everything that has been handed to them, and that they must be thrown out into the wilderness to fend for themselves?
———
Still persisting with this facking stupid argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Darren, go have a read of some of these comments on this article.
Along the lines of
"It's not fair that they're born into wealth"
"They haven't done anything to deserve what they own"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just because there are a couple of crossovers, it doesn't mean the comparison is wholly sound. The monarchy is a single institution, of which some are arguing for the abolition. 'Celebrity' is a much more nebulous thing. David Beckham made his money the way many others do; he just made more of it - along what lines would someone take it off his children?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I never said they were an exact match but there are similarities.
I never said take money off his kids either. Specifically said comments to be made on his family 1000 years down the line (if they're still rich) because they didn't earn it themselves.
I can picture it now, if a Beckham in 1000 years is sitting atop a castle somewhere and someone goes "the feck has this cant done to deserve this? He's done nothing but live off his ancestors for a thousand years, and his dad was only focking good at curling a bag of leather. Why the feck did he get rich from that anyway?!"
Page 12 of 21
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17