| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee 09:27 - Jun 6 with 1590 views | SaintNick |
The monarchy has took some stick over the past few years, but has the Jubilee brought them a little more support than they have had of late |  |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |  |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 09:50 - Jun 6 with 1567 views | darthvader |
Yes |  |
| |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 10:23 - Jun 6 with 1531 views | SaintNick |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 09:50 - Jun 6 by darthvader |
Yes |
Why ? | |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 12:41 - Jun 6 with 1464 views | sledger |
Notice prince andrew conveniently contracted covid so his participation couldnt taint proceedings. |  | | |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 12:51 - Jun 6 with 1457 views | saint22 |
Nope and its reinvigorated | | | |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 13:05 - Jun 6 with 1447 views | saint901 |
I confess to having had Republican views most of my life.
Whilst a Republic has its own problems, it does not have (in a perfect world) people who enjoy privilege and luxury and all the trappings of elevated status, just be accident of birth.
The British aristocracy has produced some key people at key moments in our history and it would be churlish not to acknowledge that. At a time when opportunity for the "lower" social classes was severely limited by their assumed status and lack of education (and therefore were unable to fulfill their potential), the educated classes by and large had ascendancy.
Those days should be over. Universal education and the opportunity for all those willing (not necessarily able) to seize them has brought to the fore a large number of individuals who have achieved status through their own efforts. A meritocracy.
Unfortunately the "Establishment" continues to promote those of "breeding" and we are presently in a state of flux between the declining influence of the "well born" and the rising influence of the as yet disorganised "lower" classes.
I'm not preaching revolution or harm to anybody, least of all the Queen (whose position I profoundly disagree with but anybody who does even a part time job in the lap of luxury for 70 years deserves some credit), but it's time for a change.
By all means keep a monarchy but limit public spending on them and dismantle those institutions through which they continue to claim influence. For instance, the Queen is meant to be apolitical so why send her Gov't boxes?
Remove the House of Lords and replace it with a smaller but more effective and influential body that must be balanced in terms of political spectrum.
Unfortunately we saw in London and elsewhere tens of thousands who continue to believe that a monarchy is something to be proud of, deferential toward and perhaps even subservient to. I suspect most of those people have never really stopped to think about that but are blindly following what their parents did.
The Jubilee has not changed my opinion. Charles, Andrew, Harry, William and no doubt many minor Royals are not the paragons of virtue that I point my children to and doubt that these leopards can change their spots.
Retire gracefully when the Queen is no longer with us. | | | |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 14:05 - Jun 6 with 1391 views | Bazza |
Very well argued. I’m in full agreement. | | | |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 14:19 - Jun 6 with 1384 views | darthvader |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 10:23 - Jun 6 by SaintNick |
Why ? |
Why not ? | |
| |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 14:21 - Jun 6 with 1381 views | darthvader |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 13:05 - Jun 6 by saint901 |
I confess to having had Republican views most of my life.
Whilst a Republic has its own problems, it does not have (in a perfect world) people who enjoy privilege and luxury and all the trappings of elevated status, just be accident of birth.
The British aristocracy has produced some key people at key moments in our history and it would be churlish not to acknowledge that. At a time when opportunity for the "lower" social classes was severely limited by their assumed status and lack of education (and therefore were unable to fulfill their potential), the educated classes by and large had ascendancy.
Those days should be over. Universal education and the opportunity for all those willing (not necessarily able) to seize them has brought to the fore a large number of individuals who have achieved status through their own efforts. A meritocracy.
Unfortunately the "Establishment" continues to promote those of "breeding" and we are presently in a state of flux between the declining influence of the "well born" and the rising influence of the as yet disorganised "lower" classes.
I'm not preaching revolution or harm to anybody, least of all the Queen (whose position I profoundly disagree with but anybody who does even a part time job in the lap of luxury for 70 years deserves some credit), but it's time for a change.
By all means keep a monarchy but limit public spending on them and dismantle those institutions through which they continue to claim influence. For instance, the Queen is meant to be apolitical so why send her Gov't boxes?
Remove the House of Lords and replace it with a smaller but more effective and influential body that must be balanced in terms of political spectrum.
Unfortunately we saw in London and elsewhere tens of thousands who continue to believe that a monarchy is something to be proud of, deferential toward and perhaps even subservient to. I suspect most of those people have never really stopped to think about that but are blindly following what their parents did.
The Jubilee has not changed my opinion. Charles, Andrew, Harry, William and no doubt many minor Royals are not the paragons of virtue that I point my children to and doubt that these leopards can change their spots.
Retire gracefully when the Queen is no longer with us. |
Is that a no then ? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 14:22 - Jun 6 with 1380 views | PaleRider |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 13:05 - Jun 6 by saint901 |
I confess to having had Republican views most of my life.
Whilst a Republic has its own problems, it does not have (in a perfect world) people who enjoy privilege and luxury and all the trappings of elevated status, just be accident of birth.
The British aristocracy has produced some key people at key moments in our history and it would be churlish not to acknowledge that. At a time when opportunity for the "lower" social classes was severely limited by their assumed status and lack of education (and therefore were unable to fulfill their potential), the educated classes by and large had ascendancy.
Those days should be over. Universal education and the opportunity for all those willing (not necessarily able) to seize them has brought to the fore a large number of individuals who have achieved status through their own efforts. A meritocracy.
Unfortunately the "Establishment" continues to promote those of "breeding" and we are presently in a state of flux between the declining influence of the "well born" and the rising influence of the as yet disorganised "lower" classes.
I'm not preaching revolution or harm to anybody, least of all the Queen (whose position I profoundly disagree with but anybody who does even a part time job in the lap of luxury for 70 years deserves some credit), but it's time for a change.
By all means keep a monarchy but limit public spending on them and dismantle those institutions through which they continue to claim influence. For instance, the Queen is meant to be apolitical so why send her Gov't boxes?
Remove the House of Lords and replace it with a smaller but more effective and influential body that must be balanced in terms of political spectrum.
Unfortunately we saw in London and elsewhere tens of thousands who continue to believe that a monarchy is something to be proud of, deferential toward and perhaps even subservient to. I suspect most of those people have never really stopped to think about that but are blindly following what their parents did.
The Jubilee has not changed my opinion. Charles, Andrew, Harry, William and no doubt many minor Royals are not the paragons of virtue that I point my children to and doubt that these leopards can change their spots.
Retire gracefully when the Queen is no longer with us. |
This view tends to accord broadly with my own and is well argued. I do have some issues with the current monarch which make me believe she is not the saint that everyone makes out (to be fair, I don't know who she supports!):
1) It is clear that she has put duty before family. I wish she would abdicate and live her last months/years in a well-earned retirement. There is precedent: the pope usually stays to the bitter end but a recent pope did retire. It is also a huge vote of no-confidence in Charles, who, whatever you think of him, has also sacrificed a lot;
2) She doesn't always read the mood - years ago there was the reaction to Diana's death, which was a disgrace. Recently there have been 3 enormous f'u's to the British people - knighting Blair, having Andrew by her side in the Abbey and Camilla's Queen Consort title.
In my opinion the European models of monarchy are far more suited to the 21st century and our royals should be moving towards that sort of model. | | | |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 14:51 - Jun 6 with 1353 views | pjt50 |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 14:22 - Jun 6 by PaleRider |
This view tends to accord broadly with my own and is well argued. I do have some issues with the current monarch which make me believe she is not the saint that everyone makes out (to be fair, I don't know who she supports!):
1) It is clear that she has put duty before family. I wish she would abdicate and live her last months/years in a well-earned retirement. There is precedent: the pope usually stays to the bitter end but a recent pope did retire. It is also a huge vote of no-confidence in Charles, who, whatever you think of him, has also sacrificed a lot;
2) She doesn't always read the mood - years ago there was the reaction to Diana's death, which was a disgrace. Recently there have been 3 enormous f'u's to the British people - knighting Blair, having Andrew by her side in the Abbey and Camilla's Queen Consort title.
In my opinion the European models of monarchy are far more suited to the 21st century and our royals should be moving towards that sort of model. |
Quite. Here in The Netherlands Queen Beatrix retired when she was 75. It was probably best for her and for the monarchy as well - although it's recently lost some of its popularity as I'm sure it will in the UK when Charles takes over. [Post edited 6 Jun 2022 23:02]
| |
| |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 15:01 - Jun 6 with 1331 views | darthvader |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 14:51 - Jun 6 by pjt50 |
Quite. Here in The Netherlands Queen Beatrix retired when she was 75. It was probably best for her and for the monarchy as well - although it's recently lost some of its popularity as I'm sure it will in the UK when Charles takes over. [Post edited 6 Jun 2022 23:02]
|
I think any real change will only happen when William VI takes The Throne
Hopefully in my lifetime id like to see him crowned .
Not that i wish death on his dad and nan before him ofcourse [Post edited 6 Jun 2022 15:26]
| |
| |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 15:19 - Jun 6 with 1317 views | GasGiant |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 13:05 - Jun 6 by saint901 |
I confess to having had Republican views most of my life.
Whilst a Republic has its own problems, it does not have (in a perfect world) people who enjoy privilege and luxury and all the trappings of elevated status, just be accident of birth.
The British aristocracy has produced some key people at key moments in our history and it would be churlish not to acknowledge that. At a time when opportunity for the "lower" social classes was severely limited by their assumed status and lack of education (and therefore were unable to fulfill their potential), the educated classes by and large had ascendancy.
Those days should be over. Universal education and the opportunity for all those willing (not necessarily able) to seize them has brought to the fore a large number of individuals who have achieved status through their own efforts. A meritocracy.
Unfortunately the "Establishment" continues to promote those of "breeding" and we are presently in a state of flux between the declining influence of the "well born" and the rising influence of the as yet disorganised "lower" classes.
I'm not preaching revolution or harm to anybody, least of all the Queen (whose position I profoundly disagree with but anybody who does even a part time job in the lap of luxury for 70 years deserves some credit), but it's time for a change.
By all means keep a monarchy but limit public spending on them and dismantle those institutions through which they continue to claim influence. For instance, the Queen is meant to be apolitical so why send her Gov't boxes?
Remove the House of Lords and replace it with a smaller but more effective and influential body that must be balanced in terms of political spectrum.
Unfortunately we saw in London and elsewhere tens of thousands who continue to believe that a monarchy is something to be proud of, deferential toward and perhaps even subservient to. I suspect most of those people have never really stopped to think about that but are blindly following what their parents did.
The Jubilee has not changed my opinion. Charles, Andrew, Harry, William and no doubt many minor Royals are not the paragons of virtue that I point my children to and doubt that these leopards can change their spots.
Retire gracefully when the Queen is no longer with us. |
I am a monarchist though not a Royalist, in the sense that I am not interested in the personalities, but I am convinced of the benefits of the presence of the institution because it removes the danger of factionalism and favour that exists when a Presidential head of state is someone who can gift property, power and influence. (The Royals can do little beyond recommending gongs to the honours committee). If we had a presidential system what would our president do? We could create a president with no exective power (as in Germany) except to open fetes and patronise (their own) choice of "worthy" causes until death or deposotion. Alternatively we could have a hands on French style president, who with an entirely separate executive institution who would try or tend to subsume Parliament. Or we could have a US system where Paliament doesn't really have anything to do except act as a check to Presidential excess. In all cases I don't see we the people gain. I am not persuaded by anyone who bangs on about supposed Royal Privilege. What privilege? To spend ones life on a goldfish bowl, with every day mapped out in some hideous real life Gormenghast - and every day charted and directed from birth to death, all the time under the withering commentaries of an endless belittling press, the butt of every uninformed insult from every stand up comic, not least in their own country. No friends who could ever be trusted not to break any tiny intimate confidence. In exchange for what? The "privilege" of travelling first class, knowing that at every state event you have to stand and make a speech. I doubt the Royals have actually enjoyed any dinner save those eaten in their own kitchen. That doesn't sound like a fair swap for a normal life so no, there is no privilege over these mythical lower orders. The main function of a Monarchist system is simply to be there. To remove the possibility of a myriad of flawed alternative systems, all of which house the possibility of real French style human failure and corruption. The last four days have shown what we have and they don't, and there is nothing of the French - or indeed the US system that we need be envious of. | | | |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 15:37 - Jun 6 with 1301 views | Saintsforeverj |
There are fair conversations to have about the amount of money spent on the Royal Family, i.e do they need so many castles and palaces and should we have a say about how much they have for luxury food etc. It's tax payers money. So yes there is that side of it. I'd be interested to know how much tourists bring in though, money we wouldn't have if we didn't have a royal family. We could also argue fairly, not to pay for any members who have done wrong etc.
But, I'm for having a Royal Family. They are an interest across the world. They bring joy, happiness and celebration across the country. They bring national pride. They bring some days off! And there is years of history there. They have also done a lot of good work. Lots of charity work. Look at the good Diana did for so many people. She couldn't have done it, had there not been a royal family. The Prince's trust has done a lot of good. So yes, let's maybe consider what they have and how much we pay, but let's keep them imo. [Post edited 6 Jun 2022 15:42]
| |
| |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 15:59 - Jun 6 with 1278 views | cocklebreath |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 13:05 - Jun 6 by saint901 |
I confess to having had Republican views most of my life.
Whilst a Republic has its own problems, it does not have (in a perfect world) people who enjoy privilege and luxury and all the trappings of elevated status, just be accident of birth.
The British aristocracy has produced some key people at key moments in our history and it would be churlish not to acknowledge that. At a time when opportunity for the "lower" social classes was severely limited by their assumed status and lack of education (and therefore were unable to fulfill their potential), the educated classes by and large had ascendancy.
Those days should be over. Universal education and the opportunity for all those willing (not necessarily able) to seize them has brought to the fore a large number of individuals who have achieved status through their own efforts. A meritocracy.
Unfortunately the "Establishment" continues to promote those of "breeding" and we are presently in a state of flux between the declining influence of the "well born" and the rising influence of the as yet disorganised "lower" classes.
I'm not preaching revolution or harm to anybody, least of all the Queen (whose position I profoundly disagree with but anybody who does even a part time job in the lap of luxury for 70 years deserves some credit), but it's time for a change.
By all means keep a monarchy but limit public spending on them and dismantle those institutions through which they continue to claim influence. For instance, the Queen is meant to be apolitical so why send her Gov't boxes?
Remove the House of Lords and replace it with a smaller but more effective and influential body that must be balanced in terms of political spectrum.
Unfortunately we saw in London and elsewhere tens of thousands who continue to believe that a monarchy is something to be proud of, deferential toward and perhaps even subservient to. I suspect most of those people have never really stopped to think about that but are blindly following what their parents did.
The Jubilee has not changed my opinion. Charles, Andrew, Harry, William and no doubt many minor Royals are not the paragons of virtue that I point my children to and doubt that these leopards can change their spots.
Retire gracefully when the Queen is no longer with us. |
That was dull |  |
| |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 16:31 - Jun 6 with 1255 views | saint901 |
I agree with much of Mr GasGiant above in that members of the Royal Family attending state functions and the opening of the 200th Aldi superstore, probably endure rather than enjoy most of those occasions.
I also agree that living in an environment where every action and everything you say is analysed and interpreted depending on the recipients prejudices, can be wearing and damaging to your mental health.
The Royals have learnt to deal with this with their "never complain, never explain" policy and a staff well versed in deflecting criticism and sheltering them from many potential sources of adverse commentary. Harder today perhaps with eletronic social media but does the Queen have a mobile phone?
Ultimately we also have to remember that the life she and her family leads is a CHOICE.
She could at any time have done what her uncle did and walk away. Her son, grandson etc can also make that choice.
I hear the comparison with the different types of President we could have. We could invent our own type of head of state. We could vest them with unilateral power or limit them to ceremonial duties - I don't mind so long as it's our choice and if we get it wrong we have a chance to correct it.
I don't mind the money we spend. I suspect that the income from tourism and people walking around the palaces etc more than meets the cost. But they would do this regardless of whether we had an active monarchy or not.
I don't care about the debate as to whether she is "hard working" or a part timer. I don't care that she is used for subtle message delivery by the Gov't of the day which I suppose could be useful as well as dangerous.
I do care that I have no influence over any of the above. I care that my passport says that I am a "subject" of the monarch. I care that the public media (the BBC being the worst) adopt a hushed and deferential tone when talking about this supposed "superior" family. (I do take a certain perverse pleasure when some of the coverage in the media was hijacked by what that rampant narcissist Harry's wife, was wearing or saying or talking to.)
I will not live to see a republic. Nor I suspect will my children. For me however the system of monarchy is a dead man walking and the sooner they realise that, the more chance they have of arranging a graceful exit. | | | |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 17:51 - Jun 6 with 1185 views | kentsouthampton |
[Post edited 6 Jun 2022 17:51]
|  | | |
| Are We All Revigorated After The Jubilee on 20:14 - Jun 6 with 1068 views | Bazza |
Be useful to repossess all the crown property and estates that were power grabbed by their medieval ancestors and put to better purpose. Some are already owned by us plebs. Why do so few people require so many palaces, castles and mansions, serious question? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
