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.

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

But before that happens there is the small question of how we initially decide on whether to have a monarchy or not. The thought of another referendum brings me out in a cold sweat, what if we end up with a situation where say Scotland for example voted against and England voted for, or if its 52/48? Do we also involve Australia, Canada etc in a referendum?

I'd rather pay my £1.29 and stick with what we've got than go through anything like that again thanks.

Monarchy by definition precludes democracy, see below. People have to believe that some other knobhead is superior to them, in order for it to work.

Sounds like a pile of crap to me, who would want that?

People have to believe that some other knobhead is superior to them, in order for it to work.

Exactly. But are any of the supporters actually going to acknowledge that? Even to themselves?

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.

Would you like to find the post where I said that?

Well said @ChurchofLatterDayPaints All your posts.

Would you like to find the post where I said that?

It’s the logical conclusion of everything you’ve said.

You say you support the system. So if that’s true, it matters not a jot about the personality of the next in line. You’re behind them.

No of course they won't, KeatingFive. I think it's a religious thing, like in the Middle Ages when they actually did believe the king was appointed by God and knew best. They seem to be comforted by putting their trust in a higher power, then get all upset when the higher power behaves badly.

The queen's a bit shit guys, sorry. No better than the rest of us.

Just off to burn in hell, see you later.

@TheKeatingFive

People have to believe that some other knobhead is superior to them, in order for it to work.

Exactly. But are any of the supporters actually going to acknowledge that? Even to themselves?

Obviously they’re not superior, they’re human beings. Why is there such a complete inability to separate the institution from the personalities? Come on, some of you are obviously highly intelligent, why are you finding this so difficult?

The whole entire point of monarchy is that you get who you get and you don’t get upset (actually you go out and wave flags for them)

Obviously they’re not superior, they’re human beings. Why is there such a complete inability to separate the institution from the personalities?

Because it’s baked into the institution that no matter how stupid or cruel they are they have power, influence and riches far and above you. That’s obvious. Can’t you see it?

@TheKeatingFive

The whole entire point of monarchy is that you get who you get and you don’t get upset (actually you go out and wave flags for them)

That isn’t the point at all. It’s a minor aspect. Presumably you support the concept of a judiciary, you have no say in who you get, you can’t get rid of them if you don’t like them, some of them are rubbish. You don’t want to abolish it though.

They seem to be comforted by putting their trust in a higher power, then get all upset when the higher power behaves badly.

I guess you’re right.

My mind just absolutely cracks open when they’re presented with Andrew and they’re like, okay cool, let’s get behind that.

And yes I know it didn’t come to pass but it could have. Frankly Charles isn’t much better.

That isn’t the point at all. It’s a minor aspect.

Nope it is absolutely the entire point.

But actually I’m not surprised that the most ardent monarchists don’t actually understand it. That explains a lot.

@TheKeatingFive

That isn’t the point at all. It’s a minor aspect.

Nope it is absolutely the entire point.

But actually I’m not surprised that the most ardent monarchists don’t actually understand it. That explains a lot.

And the rest of that post?

Presumably you support the concept of a judiciary, you have no say in who you get, you can’t get rid of them if you don’t like them, some of them are rubbish

The judiciary don’t get appointed due to falling out of the right vagina. That’s a pretty crucial difference.

And the rest of that post?

Happy?

Not everything has to be a democratic process, but only the monarchy and

Soz

I was going to say I see no justification for appointing people to things purely on birth alone, much less to the highest standing in the country;

you have no say in who you get, you can’t get rid of them if you don’t like them, some of them are rubbish

That surely amounts to the same thing.

By the way this falling out of vaginas thing’s getting a bit tedious, can’t you think of a more original alternative?

By the way this falling out of vaginas thing’s getting a bit tedious, can’t you think of a more original alternative?

I just keep hoping you’ll see the stupidity of the whole thing eventually.

A vain hope, I’m sure 😉

Well, hardcore batshit is difficult to argue with and I'm just a thick-as-shit republican, but here goes:

The institution of monarchy, like fascism, is anti-democratic. You could put the most saintly and virtuous human being in a palace and fawn, scrape and bow to them because of who gave birth to them: they are making huge decisions for huge numbers of people who never asked them to do that, people who have been coerced or acquiesced because they had no choice. The people have no power, the monarch has it all, and so they will always be open to corruption.

They can do whatever they like. And that's what they do.

That surely amounts to the same thing.

Do you mean the judiciary?

I see a crucial difference between those who get qualified, climb through the ranks and are promoted by their peers.

Rather than … oh yes … fell out of the right vagina.

Don’t you?

@TheKeatingFive

That surely amounts to the same thing.

Do you mean the judiciary?

I see a crucial difference between those who get qualified, climb through the ranks and are promoted by their peers.

Rather than … oh yes … fell out of the right vagina.

Don’t you?

Not really. I’m not an advocate of nepotism which is how judges get elevated to their positions.

No @TheKeatingFive is on-point there: if the royals didn't keep falling out of vaginas with such dizzying frequency we might not even be having this scintillating debate.

Roll on October. I wonder if Amazon are doing Judge Kapkan t shirts yet.

Not really. I’m not an advocate of nepotism which is how judges get elevated to their positions.

But they’re not actually born into it are they? And will ascend to it no matter how stupid, how incompetent, how immoral or how unpleasant they are?