Well given that your precise language did not mention political controversy but merely controversy, I think you’ll find that I did GET YOU. Get me?
I’m bored of you now. Have a good day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right, if I had used a different wording, it would have been harder for you to take what I said out of context, though you understood the context, to make a bad faith objection. That's on me. Have an amazing day yourself.
"I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any)."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another issue for me really. The 'British' values they are said to represent don't really represent me. Imposing a non-Welsh Prince of Wales on us doesn't help that either. Loads of people think Wales is in England! Thank goodness we're in a World Cup group with England and USA. Perhaps that'll educate some that we're a different country!
Scat nav is such a hilarious poster. Never has someone displayed such a vivid example of Dunning Kruger as he does on these pages as he fulfils his wish fantasy and tries to spar with Red Russian who absolutely destroys him every time.
I just wanna thank the queen for my day off work tomorrow
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 17 minutes ago
Well given that your precise language did not mention political controversy but merely controversy, I think you’ll find that I did GET YOU. Get me?
I’m bored of you now. Have a good day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right, if I had used a different wording, it would have been harder for you to take what I said out of context, though you understood the context, to make a bad faith objection. That's on me. Have an amazing day yourself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Who elects the German president? The citizens right? Nobody political?
It’s like Fergie being a director, I don’t think he’s causing troubles. If he were interfering with every manager and lots of decisions then I’d feel differently.
=≠=
But the mere presence of Fergie at the training grounds would have a big impact, even though he wouldn't be the manager. In fact, that matter of Fergie often being in the bakground has been an issue for United a TV some point in the past, if memory serves.
comment by Serious Thorgen Kloppinson - No laughing matter (U1282)
posted 4 minutes ago
It’s like Fergie being a director, I don’t think he’s causing troubles. If he were interfering with every manager and lots of decisions then I’d feel differently.
=≠=
But the mere presence of Fergie at the training grounds would have a big impact, even though he wouldn't be the manager. In fact, that matter of Fergie often being in the bakground has been an issue for United a TV some point in the past, if memory serves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps and I don’t doubt that at times it has. This is probably the closest to what Red Russian is talking about. But, and as he has also stated, there are far more notable items that are influencing things at United / our country. I just think that Red Russians belief that the monarchy is holding our country back in terms of a political system is far-fetched. Whereas, I can clearly understand that Fergie’s presence or shadow is daunting for the current management. I’m not so sure he has much influence on the actual running of the club these days, however. Which would probably be the distinction between Red Russian and myself within this analogy.
It’s all behind closed doors so we might never know what influence, if any, Fergie has on the club itself and how it’s being run.
And I totally understand that perspective. The indifference to them. I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any).
======
Then you have t been around the world enough, and even if you did, most people would just avoid negative conversations about the monarchy especially if they know you're British.
The fact is the monarchy is seen by many globally as a remaining icon of oppression, colonialism, stolen wealth, cultures thousands of years old massacred in decades, slavery, forced labour, concentration camps etc etc.
It's hard to get that vibe when you're cooped up in well off UK having been fed a fairy tale of the UKs history all your life, first by the education system and societal relations and then by the media while taking time to visit museums full of other people's cultural and political artifacts, the tangible spoils of empire, which they've been trying to get back for decades, but we won't give them back.
Perhaps and I don’t doubt that at times it has. This is probably the closest to what Red Russian is talking about. But, and as he has also stated, there are far more notable items that are influencing things at United / our country
======
I don't agree with this argument. You do what you can when you can. You fix what you can when you can. You can't let an opportunity to fix a situation pass you by just because there are bigger apparent situations.
comment by Serious Thorgen Kloppinson - No laughing matter (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
Perhaps and I don’t doubt that at times it has. This is probably the closest to what Red Russian is talking about. But, and as he has also stated, there are far more notable items that are influencing things at United / our country
======
I don't agree with this argument. You do what you can when you can. You fix what you can when you can. You can't let an opportunity to fix a situation pass you by just because there are bigger apparent situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
don't let 'perfect' be the enemy of 'good'
comment by Serious Thorgen Kloppinson - No laughing matter (U1282)
posted 23 minutes ago
And I totally understand that perspective. The indifference to them. I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any).
======
Then you have t been around the world enough, and even if you did, most people would just avoid negative conversations about the monarchy especially if they know you're British.
The fact is the monarchy is seen by many globally as a remaining icon of oppression, colonialism, stolen wealth, cultures thousands of years old massacred in decades, slavery, forced labour, concentration camps etc etc.
It's hard to get that vibe when you're cooped up in well off UK having been fed a fairy tale of the UKs history all your life, first by the education system and societal relations and then by the media while taking time to visit museums full of other people's cultural and political artifacts, the tangible spoils of empire, which they've been trying to get back for decades, but we won't give them back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure that is true just because there are many who see the way you describe. There are circa 8 billion people on the planet - how many is many?
After a very quick search, I found the following which backs up what I am saying and refutes what you are:
Across the world, views towards the Royal Family are more favourable than unfavourable (by 35% to 11% on average), though around half are either neutral (37%) or don’t know (16%). Outside of the UK, the most positive countries are Romania (58% favourable), Saudi Arabia (50%), India (48%) and the US (43%) – while Spain and Argentina are the most negative (only 18% favourable in each). In Australia 42% are favourable towards the Royal Family, and 15% are unfavourable.
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-05/royal_wedding_charts.pdf
Now I will grant that you will put this down to your adored Meghan Markle's influence above anything else
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
"I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any)."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another issue for me really. The 'British' values they are said to represent don't really represent me. Imposing a non-Welsh Prince of Wales on us doesn't help that either. Loads of people think Wales is in England! Thank goodness we're in a World Cup group with England and USA. Perhaps that'll educate some that we're a different country!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Serious Thorgen Kloppinson - No laughing matter (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
Perhaps and I don’t doubt that at times it has. This is probably the closest to what Red Russian is talking about. But, and as he has also stated, there are far more notable items that are influencing things at United / our country
======
I don't agree with this argument. You do what you can when you can. You fix what you can when you can. You can't let an opportunity to fix a situation pass you by just because there are bigger apparent situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
don't let 'perfect' be the enemy of 'good'
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wise words, very wise words
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
"I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any)."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another issue for me really. The 'British' values they are said to represent don't really represent me. Imposing a non-Welsh Prince of Wales on us doesn't help that either. Loads of people think Wales is in England! Thank goodness we're in a World Cup group with England and USA. Perhaps that'll educate some that we're a different country!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL indeed. It is true though!
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
It's been a very interesting discussion above gents.
I'll add that my main issue with monarchy is the fact it suggests that some people are 'better' than others just because of the family they're born into. That, in itself, is a pretty good reason to scrap the monarchy IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I definitely think it used to but I don't get that vibe so much these days. Elizabeth in particular whilst extremely well-spoken was very personable publicly and didn't come across as thinking that she was better than others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You either don't read or don't think?
He didn't suggest that the monarchy think they are better. He only said that the birthright implied it. That said, it comes across to me from the attitude of some of them that they believe they are.
And when every road is closed for your easy access, when every place you visit is freshly painted and cleaned to within an inch of its life, when you can get access to almost any country, town, building, club just by asking or waiting for the invite, when everyone you meet has scrubbed up for the occasion, when every request is granted, when everyone bows, when you get to drive straight through to the RAF plane steps laid on for you, when someone lays out your clothes and dresses you, cooks swans for you.....anyway you get the gist?
Now accidents of birth affect us all albeit we mostly have ways to help escape it.
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
It's been a very interesting discussion above gents.
I'll add that my main issue with monarchy is the fact it suggests that some people are 'better' than others just because of the family they're born into. That, in itself, is a pretty good reason to scrap the monarchy IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I definitely think it used to but I don't get that vibe so much these days. Elizabeth in particular whilst extremely well-spoken was very personable publicly and didn't come across as thinking that she was better than others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You either don't read or don't think?
He didn't suggest that the monarchy think they are better. He only said that the birthright implied it. That said, it comes across to me from the attitude of some of them that they believe they are.
And when every road is closed for your easy access, when every place you visit is freshly painted and cleaned to within an inch of its life, when you can get access to almost any country, town, building, club just by asking or waiting for the invite, when everyone you meet has scrubbed up for the occasion, when every request is granted, when everyone bows, when you get to drive straight through to the RAF plane steps laid on for you, when someone lays out your clothes and dresses you, cooks swans for you.....anyway you get the gist?
Now accidents of birth affect us all albeit we mostly have ways to help escape it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes Silver. That's what I meant.
I don't blame the individuals as such as it's not their fault which family they're born into but, I must say, it doesn't sit right with me.
It’s funny that people think the Queen is apolitical.
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 7 minutes ago
It’s funny that people think the Queen is apolitical.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you should explain how she wasn’t.
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
It's been a very interesting discussion above gents.
I'll add that my main issue with monarchy is the fact it suggests that some people are 'better' than others just because of the family they're born into. That, in itself, is a pretty good reason to scrap the monarchy IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I definitely think it used to but I don't get that vibe so much these days. Elizabeth in particular whilst extremely well-spoken was very personable publicly and didn't come across as thinking that she was better than others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You either don't read or don't think?
He didn't suggest that the monarchy think they are better. He only said that the birthright implied it. That said, it comes across to me from the attitude of some of them that they believe they are.
And when every road is closed for your easy access, when every place you visit is freshly painted and cleaned to within an inch of its life, when you can get access to almost any country, town, building, club just by asking or waiting for the invite, when everyone you meet has scrubbed up for the occasion, when every request is granted, when everyone bows, when you get to drive straight through to the RAF plane steps laid on for you, when someone lays out your clothes and dresses you, cooks swans for you.....anyway you get the gist?
Now accidents of birth affect us all albeit we mostly have ways to help escape it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes I didn’t read it properly. The birthing lottery exists all over the world, I have no issue with it. I much more concerned with the drive for equality of outcome.
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 17 minutes ago
Well given that your precise language did not mention political controversy but merely controversy, I think you’ll find that I did GET YOU. Get me?
I’m bored of you now. Have a good day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right, if I had used a different wording, it would have been harder for you to take what I said out of context, though you understood the context, to make a bad faith objection. That's on me. Have an amazing day yourself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Who elects the German president? The citizens right? Nobody political?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought you ended the discussion because you were bored talking to me?
Are you implying that if people vote, it's "political". So e.g. the X-Factor is also political, right? But let's not get bogged down in the semantics of that word and go back to the fundamental outcomes and aspirations we have in mind.
When we discussed the idea of a non-political figurehead president, the contrast that you drew was with the world of party politics, which as we know can be fraught and divisive because it's a mechanism for mediating struggles between different interest groups and ideologies. I agree with you that it's a positive if the head of state is not part of that world, because it's valuable to have someone who isn't associated with that kind of polarisation who can reflect on the unifying values and interests of the whole population. That's why, for example, I would be very cautious about replacing a monarchy with a system (like France or the US) where the president is also the executive.
But in the context of presidents that have no executive power, your initial argument was that any elected presidency would inevitably become political, by which I assume you meant that it would inevitably be subject to the division and polarisation that we see in party politics, not that it is (like the X Factor) subject to popular participation. If I understood correctly, then I think the example of dozens of constitutional democracies with an elected, ceremonial president shows demonstrates that this is not the case: there are many examples of countries where the presidency has succeeded in the long term at responsibly executing the constitutional requirements of the head of state while also acting effectively as a unifying national figurehead who is not tainted by party politics.
I'd add two potential advantages to such a system. Firstly, if such a president fails to execute their responsibilities well, the people can replace them. Secondly, there's a danger that a hereditary monarch, mindful of the perception of overreach against the democratically elected government, may be too timid in relation to unconstitutional behaviour on the part of the latter. When Johnson prorogued the House of Commons in 2019, it was widely seen to be unlawful (and eventually confirmed as such by the Supreme Court) and the Queen was put in an unenviable situation where either course of action (defy the PM or accept his unlawful request) created a bit of a constitutional crisis.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 17 minutes ago
Well given that your precise language did not mention political controversy but merely controversy, I think you’ll find that I did GET YOU. Get me?
I’m bored of you now. Have a good day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right, if I had used a different wording, it would have been harder for you to take what I said out of context, though you understood the context, to make a bad faith objection. That's on me. Have an amazing day yourself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Who elects the German president? The citizens right? Nobody political?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought you ended the discussion because you were bored talking to me?
Are you implying that if people vote, it's "political". So e.g. the X-Factor is also political, right? But let's not get bogged down in the semantics of that word and go back to the fundamental outcomes and aspirations we have in mind.
When we discussed the idea of a non-political figurehead president, the contrast that you drew was with the world of party politics, which as we know can be fraught and divisive because it's a mechanism for mediating struggles between different interest groups and ideologies. I agree with you that it's a positive if the head of state is not part of that world, because it's valuable to have someone who isn't associated with that kind of polarisation who can reflect on the unifying values and interests of the whole population. That's why, for example, I would be very cautious about replacing a monarchy with a system (like France or the US) where the president is also the executive.
But in the context of presidents that have no executive power, your initial argument was that any elected presidency would inevitably become political, by which I assume you meant that it would inevitably be subject to the division and polarisation that we see in party politics, not that it is (like the X Factor) subject to popular participation. If I understood correctly, then I think the example of dozens of constitutional democracies with an elected, ceremonial president shows demonstrates that this is not the case: there are many examples of countries where the presidency has succeeded in the long term at responsibly executing the constitutional requirements of the head of state while also acting effectively as a unifying national figurehead who is not tainted by party politics.
I'd add two potential advantages to such a system. Firstly, if such a president fails to execute their responsibilities well, the people can replace them. Secondly, there's a danger that a hereditary monarch, mindful of the perception of overreach against the democratically elected government, may be too timid in relation to unconstitutional behaviour on the part of the latter. When Johnson prorogued the House of Commons in 2019, it was widely seen to be unlawful (and eventually confirmed as such by the Supreme Court) and the Queen was put in an unenviable situation where either course of action (defy the PM or accept his unlawful request) created a bit of a constitutional crisis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I became interested again. I was implying that it’s not the citizens who vote, I think it’s members of the Bundestag.
Appreciate that they have a 5 year term and can be ousted but I think that they have more power than our monarchy does.
I also understand that the mediator role is what takes place in many places across europe but again, I just don't want that. The monarchy we have are completely apolitical, their part of our tradition, the symbolise our historical and ever-diminishing values and comportments. I don't think they cost us much money, if at all. So I don't personally see the need to move towards abolishing them. Their role doesn't hold us back.
*they're - yuck can't believe I wrote their
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 19 minutes ago
The monarchy... symbolise our historical and ever-diminishing values and comportments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If our values are deference to a ruling class mixed with an inflated and exceptionalist view of our place in the world you're probably right. Thank god they're diminishing then.
Geez, last thing we need is a president mediator along the lickspittle lines of Hoyle or Bercow.
Sign in if you want to comment
The Queens funeral today
Page 18 of 20
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
posted on 21/9/22
Well given that your precise language did not mention political controversy but merely controversy, I think you’ll find that I did GET YOU. Get me?
I’m bored of you now. Have a good day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right, if I had used a different wording, it would have been harder for you to take what I said out of context, though you understood the context, to make a bad faith objection. That's on me. Have an amazing day yourself.
posted on 21/9/22
"I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any)."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another issue for me really. The 'British' values they are said to represent don't really represent me. Imposing a non-Welsh Prince of Wales on us doesn't help that either. Loads of people think Wales is in England! Thank goodness we're in a World Cup group with England and USA. Perhaps that'll educate some that we're a different country!
posted on 21/9/22
Scat nav is such a hilarious poster. Never has someone displayed such a vivid example of Dunning Kruger as he does on these pages as he fulfils his wish fantasy and tries to spar with Red Russian who absolutely destroys him every time.
posted on 21/9/22
I just wanna thank the queen for my day off work tomorrow
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 17 minutes ago
Well given that your precise language did not mention political controversy but merely controversy, I think you’ll find that I did GET YOU. Get me?
I’m bored of you now. Have a good day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right, if I had used a different wording, it would have been harder for you to take what I said out of context, though you understood the context, to make a bad faith objection. That's on me. Have an amazing day yourself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Who elects the German president? The citizens right? Nobody political?
posted on 21/9/22
It’s like Fergie being a director, I don’t think he’s causing troubles. If he were interfering with every manager and lots of decisions then I’d feel differently.
=≠=
But the mere presence of Fergie at the training grounds would have a big impact, even though he wouldn't be the manager. In fact, that matter of Fergie often being in the bakground has been an issue for United a TV some point in the past, if memory serves.
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Serious Thorgen Kloppinson - No laughing matter (U1282)
posted 4 minutes ago
It’s like Fergie being a director, I don’t think he’s causing troubles. If he were interfering with every manager and lots of decisions then I’d feel differently.
=≠=
But the mere presence of Fergie at the training grounds would have a big impact, even though he wouldn't be the manager. In fact, that matter of Fergie often being in the bakground has been an issue for United a TV some point in the past, if memory serves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps and I don’t doubt that at times it has. This is probably the closest to what Red Russian is talking about. But, and as he has also stated, there are far more notable items that are influencing things at United / our country. I just think that Red Russians belief that the monarchy is holding our country back in terms of a political system is far-fetched. Whereas, I can clearly understand that Fergie’s presence or shadow is daunting for the current management. I’m not so sure he has much influence on the actual running of the club these days, however. Which would probably be the distinction between Red Russian and myself within this analogy.
It’s all behind closed doors so we might never know what influence, if any, Fergie has on the club itself and how it’s being run.
posted on 21/9/22
And I totally understand that perspective. The indifference to them. I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any).
======
Then you have t been around the world enough, and even if you did, most people would just avoid negative conversations about the monarchy especially if they know you're British.
The fact is the monarchy is seen by many globally as a remaining icon of oppression, colonialism, stolen wealth, cultures thousands of years old massacred in decades, slavery, forced labour, concentration camps etc etc.
It's hard to get that vibe when you're cooped up in well off UK having been fed a fairy tale of the UKs history all your life, first by the education system and societal relations and then by the media while taking time to visit museums full of other people's cultural and political artifacts, the tangible spoils of empire, which they've been trying to get back for decades, but we won't give them back.
posted on 21/9/22
Perhaps and I don’t doubt that at times it has. This is probably the closest to what Red Russian is talking about. But, and as he has also stated, there are far more notable items that are influencing things at United / our country
======
I don't agree with this argument. You do what you can when you can. You fix what you can when you can. You can't let an opportunity to fix a situation pass you by just because there are bigger apparent situations.
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Serious Thorgen Kloppinson - No laughing matter (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
Perhaps and I don’t doubt that at times it has. This is probably the closest to what Red Russian is talking about. But, and as he has also stated, there are far more notable items that are influencing things at United / our country
======
I don't agree with this argument. You do what you can when you can. You fix what you can when you can. You can't let an opportunity to fix a situation pass you by just because there are bigger apparent situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
don't let 'perfect' be the enemy of 'good'
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Serious Thorgen Kloppinson - No laughing matter (U1282)
posted 23 minutes ago
And I totally understand that perspective. The indifference to them. I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any).
======
Then you have t been around the world enough, and even if you did, most people would just avoid negative conversations about the monarchy especially if they know you're British.
The fact is the monarchy is seen by many globally as a remaining icon of oppression, colonialism, stolen wealth, cultures thousands of years old massacred in decades, slavery, forced labour, concentration camps etc etc.
It's hard to get that vibe when you're cooped up in well off UK having been fed a fairy tale of the UKs history all your life, first by the education system and societal relations and then by the media while taking time to visit museums full of other people's cultural and political artifacts, the tangible spoils of empire, which they've been trying to get back for decades, but we won't give them back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure that is true just because there are many who see the way you describe. There are circa 8 billion people on the planet - how many is many?
After a very quick search, I found the following which backs up what I am saying and refutes what you are:
Across the world, views towards the Royal Family are more favourable than unfavourable (by 35% to 11% on average), though around half are either neutral (37%) or don’t know (16%). Outside of the UK, the most positive countries are Romania (58% favourable), Saudi Arabia (50%), India (48%) and the US (43%) – while Spain and Argentina are the most negative (only 18% favourable in each). In Australia 42% are favourable towards the Royal Family, and 15% are unfavourable.
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-05/royal_wedding_charts.pdf
Now I will grant that you will put this down to your adored Meghan Markle's influence above anything else
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
"I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any)."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another issue for me really. The 'British' values they are said to represent don't really represent me. Imposing a non-Welsh Prince of Wales on us doesn't help that either. Loads of people think Wales is in England! Thank goodness we're in a World Cup group with England and USA. Perhaps that'll educate some that we're a different country!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL
posted on 21/9/22
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Serious Thorgen Kloppinson - No laughing matter (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
Perhaps and I don’t doubt that at times it has. This is probably the closest to what Red Russian is talking about. But, and as he has also stated, there are far more notable items that are influencing things at United / our country
======
I don't agree with this argument. You do what you can when you can. You fix what you can when you can. You can't let an opportunity to fix a situation pass you by just because there are bigger apparent situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
don't let 'perfect' be the enemy of 'good'
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wise words, very wise words
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
"I just think that across the globe there are many people that think fondly of them and look to them as an example of British values (rightly or wrongly but that’s the reality) and they really don’t cause us much harm (if any)."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another issue for me really. The 'British' values they are said to represent don't really represent me. Imposing a non-Welsh Prince of Wales on us doesn't help that either. Loads of people think Wales is in England! Thank goodness we're in a World Cup group with England and USA. Perhaps that'll educate some that we're a different country!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL indeed. It is true though!
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
It's been a very interesting discussion above gents.
I'll add that my main issue with monarchy is the fact it suggests that some people are 'better' than others just because of the family they're born into. That, in itself, is a pretty good reason to scrap the monarchy IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I definitely think it used to but I don't get that vibe so much these days. Elizabeth in particular whilst extremely well-spoken was very personable publicly and didn't come across as thinking that she was better than others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You either don't read or don't think?
He didn't suggest that the monarchy think they are better. He only said that the birthright implied it. That said, it comes across to me from the attitude of some of them that they believe they are.
And when every road is closed for your easy access, when every place you visit is freshly painted and cleaned to within an inch of its life, when you can get access to almost any country, town, building, club just by asking or waiting for the invite, when everyone you meet has scrubbed up for the occasion, when every request is granted, when everyone bows, when you get to drive straight through to the RAF plane steps laid on for you, when someone lays out your clothes and dresses you, cooks swans for you.....anyway you get the gist?
Now accidents of birth affect us all albeit we mostly have ways to help escape it.
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
It's been a very interesting discussion above gents.
I'll add that my main issue with monarchy is the fact it suggests that some people are 'better' than others just because of the family they're born into. That, in itself, is a pretty good reason to scrap the monarchy IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I definitely think it used to but I don't get that vibe so much these days. Elizabeth in particular whilst extremely well-spoken was very personable publicly and didn't come across as thinking that she was better than others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You either don't read or don't think?
He didn't suggest that the monarchy think they are better. He only said that the birthright implied it. That said, it comes across to me from the attitude of some of them that they believe they are.
And when every road is closed for your easy access, when every place you visit is freshly painted and cleaned to within an inch of its life, when you can get access to almost any country, town, building, club just by asking or waiting for the invite, when everyone you meet has scrubbed up for the occasion, when every request is granted, when everyone bows, when you get to drive straight through to the RAF plane steps laid on for you, when someone lays out your clothes and dresses you, cooks swans for you.....anyway you get the gist?
Now accidents of birth affect us all albeit we mostly have ways to help escape it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes Silver. That's what I meant.
I don't blame the individuals as such as it's not their fault which family they're born into but, I must say, it doesn't sit right with me.
posted on 21/9/22
It’s funny that people think the Queen is apolitical.
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 7 minutes ago
It’s funny that people think the Queen is apolitical.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you should explain how she wasn’t.
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
It's been a very interesting discussion above gents.
I'll add that my main issue with monarchy is the fact it suggests that some people are 'better' than others just because of the family they're born into. That, in itself, is a pretty good reason to scrap the monarchy IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I definitely think it used to but I don't get that vibe so much these days. Elizabeth in particular whilst extremely well-spoken was very personable publicly and didn't come across as thinking that she was better than others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You either don't read or don't think?
He didn't suggest that the monarchy think they are better. He only said that the birthright implied it. That said, it comes across to me from the attitude of some of them that they believe they are.
And when every road is closed for your easy access, when every place you visit is freshly painted and cleaned to within an inch of its life, when you can get access to almost any country, town, building, club just by asking or waiting for the invite, when everyone you meet has scrubbed up for the occasion, when every request is granted, when everyone bows, when you get to drive straight through to the RAF plane steps laid on for you, when someone lays out your clothes and dresses you, cooks swans for you.....anyway you get the gist?
Now accidents of birth affect us all albeit we mostly have ways to help escape it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes I didn’t read it properly. The birthing lottery exists all over the world, I have no issue with it. I much more concerned with the drive for equality of outcome.
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 17 minutes ago
Well given that your precise language did not mention political controversy but merely controversy, I think you’ll find that I did GET YOU. Get me?
I’m bored of you now. Have a good day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right, if I had used a different wording, it would have been harder for you to take what I said out of context, though you understood the context, to make a bad faith objection. That's on me. Have an amazing day yourself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Who elects the German president? The citizens right? Nobody political?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought you ended the discussion because you were bored talking to me?
Are you implying that if people vote, it's "political". So e.g. the X-Factor is also political, right? But let's not get bogged down in the semantics of that word and go back to the fundamental outcomes and aspirations we have in mind.
When we discussed the idea of a non-political figurehead president, the contrast that you drew was with the world of party politics, which as we know can be fraught and divisive because it's a mechanism for mediating struggles between different interest groups and ideologies. I agree with you that it's a positive if the head of state is not part of that world, because it's valuable to have someone who isn't associated with that kind of polarisation who can reflect on the unifying values and interests of the whole population. That's why, for example, I would be very cautious about replacing a monarchy with a system (like France or the US) where the president is also the executive.
But in the context of presidents that have no executive power, your initial argument was that any elected presidency would inevitably become political, by which I assume you meant that it would inevitably be subject to the division and polarisation that we see in party politics, not that it is (like the X Factor) subject to popular participation. If I understood correctly, then I think the example of dozens of constitutional democracies with an elected, ceremonial president shows demonstrates that this is not the case: there are many examples of countries where the presidency has succeeded in the long term at responsibly executing the constitutional requirements of the head of state while also acting effectively as a unifying national figurehead who is not tainted by party politics.
I'd add two potential advantages to such a system. Firstly, if such a president fails to execute their responsibilities well, the people can replace them. Secondly, there's a danger that a hereditary monarch, mindful of the perception of overreach against the democratically elected government, may be too timid in relation to unconstitutional behaviour on the part of the latter. When Johnson prorogued the House of Commons in 2019, it was widely seen to be unlawful (and eventually confirmed as such by the Supreme Court) and the Queen was put in an unenviable situation where either course of action (defy the PM or accept his unlawful request) created a bit of a constitutional crisis.
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 17 minutes ago
Well given that your precise language did not mention political controversy but merely controversy, I think you’ll find that I did GET YOU. Get me?
I’m bored of you now. Have a good day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right, if I had used a different wording, it would have been harder for you to take what I said out of context, though you understood the context, to make a bad faith objection. That's on me. Have an amazing day yourself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Who elects the German president? The citizens right? Nobody political?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought you ended the discussion because you were bored talking to me?
Are you implying that if people vote, it's "political". So e.g. the X-Factor is also political, right? But let's not get bogged down in the semantics of that word and go back to the fundamental outcomes and aspirations we have in mind.
When we discussed the idea of a non-political figurehead president, the contrast that you drew was with the world of party politics, which as we know can be fraught and divisive because it's a mechanism for mediating struggles between different interest groups and ideologies. I agree with you that it's a positive if the head of state is not part of that world, because it's valuable to have someone who isn't associated with that kind of polarisation who can reflect on the unifying values and interests of the whole population. That's why, for example, I would be very cautious about replacing a monarchy with a system (like France or the US) where the president is also the executive.
But in the context of presidents that have no executive power, your initial argument was that any elected presidency would inevitably become political, by which I assume you meant that it would inevitably be subject to the division and polarisation that we see in party politics, not that it is (like the X Factor) subject to popular participation. If I understood correctly, then I think the example of dozens of constitutional democracies with an elected, ceremonial president shows demonstrates that this is not the case: there are many examples of countries where the presidency has succeeded in the long term at responsibly executing the constitutional requirements of the head of state while also acting effectively as a unifying national figurehead who is not tainted by party politics.
I'd add two potential advantages to such a system. Firstly, if such a president fails to execute their responsibilities well, the people can replace them. Secondly, there's a danger that a hereditary monarch, mindful of the perception of overreach against the democratically elected government, may be too timid in relation to unconstitutional behaviour on the part of the latter. When Johnson prorogued the House of Commons in 2019, it was widely seen to be unlawful (and eventually confirmed as such by the Supreme Court) and the Queen was put in an unenviable situation where either course of action (defy the PM or accept his unlawful request) created a bit of a constitutional crisis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I became interested again. I was implying that it’s not the citizens who vote, I think it’s members of the Bundestag.
Appreciate that they have a 5 year term and can be ousted but I think that they have more power than our monarchy does.
posted on 21/9/22
I also understand that the mediator role is what takes place in many places across europe but again, I just don't want that. The monarchy we have are completely apolitical, their part of our tradition, the symbolise our historical and ever-diminishing values and comportments. I don't think they cost us much money, if at all. So I don't personally see the need to move towards abolishing them. Their role doesn't hold us back.
posted on 21/9/22
*they're - yuck can't believe I wrote their
posted on 21/9/22
comment by Sadiq Khan (world class mayor) - #JC4PM (U18243)
posted 19 minutes ago
The monarchy... symbolise our historical and ever-diminishing values and comportments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If our values are deference to a ruling class mixed with an inflated and exceptionalist view of our place in the world you're probably right. Thank god they're diminishing then.
posted on 21/9/22
Geez, last thing we need is a president mediator along the lickspittle lines of Hoyle or Bercow.
Page 18 of 20
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20