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.

@Blosssomtoes, exactly, and now the UK over the next few years needs to reach unprecedented levels of public revulsion in order to permanently implement an effective parasite control system.

Sweden's RF are better at playing squeaky-clean and have no known nonces, so presumably the Swedish just let them get on with it (for now).

So you exchange one set of corruption for another. What’s the point?

The point is it's already corrupt, so you're not preventing corruption from happening. That excuse doesn't wash.

[quote ChurchofLatterDayPaints]@Blosssomtoes, exactly, and now the UK over the next few years needs to reach unprecedented levels of public revulsion in order to permanently implement an effective parasite control system.

Sweden's RF are better at playing squeaky-clean and have no known nonces, so presumably the Swedish just let them get on with it (for now).[/quote]
No nonces @ChurchofLatterDayPaints but there was a scandal a few years ago with rumours the king had attended sex parties and had affairs. But the Crown Princess is squeaky clean and seems very popular.

I think calling the royal family "despotic" is a bit over the top! For a start they were born to their roles, and had no choice as to whether they inherited them or not, they didn't attain them through political oppression or violence.

However I do think the abolition of the RF will stop privilege being embedded at the heart of the nation and put an end to all the spin off hereditary dukedoms and hereditary peers in the House of Lords etc. It would make a start at putting an end to privilege founded on birth not merit.

And we have managed to earmark, protect and retain important land and public buildings without any royal input. For example, Areas of outstanding natural beauty and national parks.

@MyOhMySimon

If you think that won't lead to corruption you're living in Cloud Cuckoo Land.

If you think there's no corruption already, then I don't know what to tell you.

I'm thinking specifically about use of land. The Duchy land is managed well and productively. If the Government gets their hands on it, it will more than likely be sold off to large conglomerates.

And we have managed to earmark, protect and retain important land and public buildings without any royal input. For example, Areas of outstanding natural beauty and national parks.
Oh FGS In your world land is all about day trips to lovely places. In mine it's using it to produce food.

I was too late to add this to the last thread, but I love that someone said Charles will be taking over a complete mess if something isn't done soon

Suits me just fine ... especially as, with his complete lack of moral authority, he hasn't a hope of addressing it

Seventhascent

That was a great post. I agree with everything you said.

@MyOhMySimon

Questioning the Monachry would be comparing the benefits between a Republic & Monarchy

It's good to question the people behind the Monarchy, those who've been peddled as blameless for ages. Now that people can see they're far from it, you think they shouldn't focus on that? They should keep their eyes closed and fawn over the very definition of self-appointed, entitled and filthy-rich while the country is barely scraping by?

THe problem is that royalists tend to use "oh the Queen has been much a good monarch/done her duty/blah blah blah" or "Lates got such nice hair oh and the kiddies are cute" or "Charles is interested in farming" for their arguments to keep the bunch of parasites. So why is it then wrong for republicans to point out their faults? Is is because if we start to really think about them, as people, role models, our superiors....we find that they are not paragons of virtue but, at best, ordinary and dull people and at worst - criminals.

they didn't attain them through political oppression or violence.

Not this one but having a look back?

@gibletjane

Someone mentioned that they do a lot for charity.

That was odd, I thought they had to do that. The idea we should be grateful? 🤔

But do they really? Or do they just turn up at great expense, in expensive clothes, smile and shake a few hands, then fuck off again.

@Seventhascent ok then, take your pick fron a few synonyms of despotic: uncontrolled, undemocratic, unconstitutional and unaccountable.

they didn't attain them through political oppression or violence.

Not this one but having a look back?

No you are right; I meant this generation obviously! But I agree you don't have to look too far back either!

despotic
[dɪˈspɒtɪk]
ADJECTIVE
of or typical of a despot; tyrannical.
"a despotic regime"
synonyms
autocratic · dictatorial · totalitarian · authoritarian · absolute · absolutist · arbitrary · unconstitutional · undemocratic · anti-democratic · uncontrolled · unaccountable · summary · one-party · single-party · autarchic · monocratic · tyrannical · oppressive · tyrannous · repressive · harsh · ruthless · merciless · draconian · illiberal · domineering · imperious · arrogant · high-handed

THe problem is that royalists tend to use "oh the Queen has been much a good monarch/done her duty/blah blah blah" or "Lates got such nice hair oh and the kiddies are cute" or "Charles is interested in farming" for their arguments to keep the bunch of parasites

I consider myself a monarchist rather than a royalist and have no interest in the personalities. I strongly believe that the country is more stable with a monarchy and protected to some extent from extremists.

A “democratically” elected head of state would be no more representative of the majority’s wishes than our “democratically” elected governments are. There are vast swathes of us whose votes don’t count because we live in safe seats.

Now you could say “use the system used for local mayoral elections with second and third choices”. Where I live in Tory central that system ended up - to my delight - with a Labour mayor who was virtually nobody’s first choice. How I laughed.

Add to that the cost, time and financial, that it would take to unpick the constitutional aspects of monarchy, entrenched over a millennium and it quickly becomes clear that it’s far more complex than it might seem.

It'll end with the passing of the Queen

It'll take a fair while to organise if it does, and in ending it we'd see just how interfering enmeshed the monarchy is in many of our systems
On that basis I really do get what folk say about stablitity, but if the cost is continuing with a monarchy, no thanks

The Telegraph online:
"Prince Andrew is being failed by his legal team's strategy, fear courtiers. Concern growing that Duke of York’s ‘wall of silence’ over sexual assault case is increasingly damaging the monarchy"

Well, let's look on the bright side: he could always do another triumphant TV interview

Despotic state = Nicola Sturgeon's rule of Scotland

And we have managed to earmark, protect and retain important land and public buildings without any royal input. For example, Areas of outstanding natural beauty and national parks.

Oh FGS In your world land is all about day trips to lovely places. In mine it's using it to produce food.

Derxa You are quite wrong. Maybe pause before being so quick to judge what my world is like when you don't know me from Adam please? I own a small farm and work with heavy horses. That doesn't automatically make me a royalist.

I am a huge supporter of farmers. I wasn't talking about farmers in this context. I was responding to a pp who was using the preservation of land as an argument to retain the monarchy.

Aye but you can get rid of Nicola Sturgeon @derxa

Pretty pathetic post really

And the people of Scotland voted for her in the first place

Yup and they're moaning like fuck now but they can vote for another party in the next elections

Ok @derxa but, since the last time I (as an English person) dared to mention Scotland in a post I got screamed at, maybe you could start a thread about NS in Scotsnet?

Aye but you can get rid of Nicola Sturgeon @derxa** The sooner the better. I'll trade you Nicola for the Royal Family

@TheKeatingFive

And the people of Scotland voted for her in the first place

I highly doubt they would have envisaged what she would have done - especially womens rights.

@derxa

Aye but you can get rid of Nicola Sturgeon @derxa** The sooner the better. I'll trade you Nicola for the Royal Family

That sounds like a fab deal to me. We'll ship them all up to you along with the bills.