To think the royal family are a bloody embarrassment THREAD 2

[MyOhMySimon]

Carrying on from Thread 1.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4347032-To-think-the-royal-family-are-a-bloody-embarrassment?msgid=110733144#110733144

Haven't seen the OP around, thread 1 is about to run out and someone asked for a new thread.

@derxa

And it’s not all about the material difference but the message you send about your country and its values to the rest of the world. Really? I'm proud of this country and its values. It's one of the least corrupt countries in the world. Andrew isn't king but his mother is. She's been a symbol of steadfastness and stability for decades as was her father during the war. You will sneer at this of course.

Which country are you proud of derxa, Scotland or England? Because the UK is only 1 country in name; the English get given short shrift on here when expressing views about what goes on north of the border (I've seen it on other forums with other posters, not just on here), yet we're all somehow one "kingdom".

We aren't united, and I'm no separatist, I'm merely observing what I see and hear from other people.

What is there to be proud of, exactly? Personally I hate the fact that the only other country commonly referred to with Kingdom in its name is KSA (best mates with Andy).

What is there to be proud of, exactly? Personally I hate the fact that the only other country commonly referred to with Kingdom in its name is KSA (best mates with Andy). Despite all the political shenanigans of the last 5 years I'm proud to be a British citizen. I'm proud to be Scottish but that's cultural pride. I'm glad to live in a country where a fifty something woman like me could enter a male dominated profession and be treated with decency and encouragement. Our politicians are hopeless at the moment But we can openly criticise and mock them without being in danger of being imprisoned or worse.

Yes I also like that about the British isles. Women can actually have lives and careers, and lots of British men genuinely do think about equality on a whole different level from southern Europe, for example.

So why do we still insist on worshipping these medieval relics and excusing their racism and misogynism, and celebrating Kate's model of the Immaculate Mother Bountiful when she hasn't done a hard day's work in her life and gets every fucking thing paid for? It sends so many wrong messages.

@Blossomtoes Toryshambles doesn't magically make the RF free of cronyism. They all stink. Where do you want to go with that argument?

That’s the only reason why I think we could possibly keep the RF - simply because the current batch of elected leaders are so horrendous. Otherwise, I’d get rid tomorrow..

So if the royals had to be elected on merit you'd vote for one of them.?

[quote ChurchofLatterDayPaints]@Blossomtoes Toryshambles doesn't magically make the RF free of cronyism. They all stink. Where do you want to go with that argument?[/quote]
I don’t want to go anywhere. I just think it’s a tad illogical to hold democracy to be the gold standard and castigate the royal family for cronyism when the democratically elected government of the day has just handed £37 billion to one of its mates.

That’s several hundred times the sovereign grant, by the way.

I just think it’s a tad illogical to hold democracy to be the gold standard

Real democracy is the gold standard. It's naive to believe that what we have in the UK is a democracy, however. The current make up of the UK parliament does not reflect the wishes of the voters, our upper house is comprised of unelected peers, many of whom bought their way there and the monarch actively lobbies for exemptions from laws.

Anyway I came here to share this news, a jolly little hagiography about Philip is going to be on our screens on 22 September.

I wonder if there'll be mention of his RTA where he could easily have killed some of his wife's subjects? Probably not.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-58497974

Probably not. I felt really sorry for him that day. The sun was so low in the sky that afternoon that it was right in your eyes. I was driving virtually blind around that time. It could so easily have been me.

I can't believe there isn't more outrage over pa actions.

A march about it!!
I guess it's because it involves sex and a female. Imagine the whole thing world would be in fire if this wash face related

[quote HarrisonStickle]Anyway I came here to share this news, a jolly little hagiography about Philip is going to be on our screens on 22 September.

I wonder if there'll be mention of his RTA where he could easily have killed some of his wife's subjects? Probably not.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-58497974[/quote]
For a moment I thought you'd gone conspiracy theorist and meant Diana!

Ok Blossom but we're just going round in circles with this. As about 25 other pp have said, we have a warped democracy and a corrupt, incompetent no-majority government: that suits the RF just fine and the monarchists play along, bleating and whinging about change and "ooh but look at Trump". No. Look at your fucking corrupt monarchy and stop wishing it was different. Stick Boris and the Q (and Keir) in a hot air balloon and they can play that game where you decide who's the most useful - none of them would come back.

All this clinging to the past just prolongs the agony. As pp have said, we need immediate electoral reform, an elected upper chamber, and for people to stop banging on and on and on about how wonderful the queen is, when the truth was patently obvious about 850 posts ago.

I'm on this thread not for an echo chamber but for the insight and info from the many posters who've actually had a look at what's really going on with the monarchy and want to know why, and what to do about it. Not really sure why you're on it apart from to defend a nonce and his landgrabbing mother.

For a moment I thought you'd gone conspiracy theorist and meant Diana!

Not really sure why you're on it apart from to defend a nonce and his landgrabbing mother.

That really is grossly unfair and highly offensive. I haven’t defended Andrew once. I find him and his actions absolutely abhorrent and I really have no idea why you’d make such an unjustified and disgusting accusation.

If you’re truly looking for insight - as opposed to an echo chamber - you’d appreciate that there’s a great deal more to removing a centuries old institution which is intrinsic to our society. The process would dwarf Brexit and the disentangling from the EU which has barely begun.

If you’re not interested in debate, that’s fine. But I’ll continue to put the other side of the argument and that’s why I’m here, despite the personal attacks and insults which had stopped until your last post. Shame on you.

I felt really sorry for (pHILIP) that day. The sun was so low in the sky that afternoon that it was right in your eyes

So how about this for an idea: don't drive if you can't see?

Even more relevant when talking about somewhere like Sandringham which has other exits - some of them not necessarily facing into the sun ...

I think the unhealthy state of what we call our democracy and the fact we have a pretty much unaccountable monarch/RF go hand in hand. They are both symptoms of the UK's longstanding sickness in this regard.

It hardly seems believable that we beheaded a monarch once!

Shame returned to sender. And also, shame on the queen and her supporters, shame on her turning of blind eyes to her family trading with Middle Eastern despots, shame on the queen for enabling PA, wasting our money and on and fucking on we go. Their lies and deception could fill 1,000 of these threads.

There is so, so much more to come out about these people.

That really is grossly unfair and highly offensive.

I agree. Just because people support the RF doesn't mean they support every last thing any of them do.

What I do disagree with is your suggestion that dismantling the monarchy would dwarf Brexit.

Let's say we decided to abolish it before the Queen died. (Which we won't, I know this, it's a hypothesis.) We'd probably let it go on, but gradually reduce the structures surrounding it bit by bit until she died.

At the same time, we'd be removing privileges from the outer circle of royals, slimming the whole thing down, possibly accepting that Charles would be head of state for an interim 5 year period after his mother died.

Buck House and Windsor Castle, and the other state owned properties can be removed as residences. They have enough properties of their own that can be utilised during and after transition.

Any head of state function would be retained until we decided on a new head of state.

And so on.

I didn't vote for Brexit but it's the minority voted government who have made it the clusterfuck it is, it needn't have been anything like this, there were many options going forward rather than this scorched earth policy. Likewise, dismantling the monarchy needn't be a mess, either.

We probably need to sort out our elected democracy first, though.

Or don't drive if you are 97 and have gazillions of quid to pay people to drive your car for you...

Just because people support the RF doesn't mean they support every last thing any of them do.

As I said at one point, I don’t support the royal family. I support the concept of monarchy. It’s different. As a poster on a different thread pointed out:

It's complicated and would take a lot of work. Our constitutional monarchy is bound up in lots of aspects of life - parliament, laws, armed forces etc. Whoever decided to dismantle it would have to amend all the different laws, rules, traditions to remove (and possibly replace) the role of the monarch with a different head of state, or something else

It needs to be modernised, for sure, and we could do a lot worse than look at successful monarchies in countries like Sweden and amend ours accordingly. I just don’t want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

You have to support at least one member of the current RF if you support the concept of a monarchy, surely? If the monarchy continues, the Queen, Charles, William and George are what we have.

@HarrisonStickle

You have to support at least one member of the current RF if you support the concept of a monarchy, surely? If the monarchy continues, the Queen, Charles, William and George are what we have.

Why? I support the concept, not the personalities.

"Monarchy is a political system based on the undivided sovereignty of a single ruler".

Fascism "... a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition".

Why? I support the concept, not the personalities.

If a monarch was doing a terrible job of being head of state and representing the UK to other countries both here and abroad, what then?

If an elected head of state was bad at the job, they could be voted out.

But a monarch may reign for many years, and we'd be stuck with them.

Or would you have some sort of safeguards in place? Like forced abdication to the next in line? (Which would be a form of "election" as it would involve some people, somewhere "voting" to replace the monarch.)

Why? I support the concept, not the personalities.

On what grounds though? Divine providence? The importance of blood? What’s the justification?

Because according to you, the biggest motherfucker known to man could fall out of the right vagina and that would be fine. He’d rule for his lifetime and you’d be happy.

I just don’t get the reasoning. The whole ‘it would be too hard to unseat them’ is understandable, but quite clearly post rationalisation of a deeper reason. If it’s the right thing to do, people would be able to acknowledge both that fact and the fact it would be hard.

So what is it. Why do you believe in a monarchical system?