The Royal Family - Does Anybody Care ?

[How I Wrote Elastic Man 1,187]

5 minutes ago, ricardo said:

If we lived in a country with a population of Greater Norwich we probably could.😉

I'm not convinced 🤔

Who would be President and Prime Minister of this sovereign nation called Greater Norwich?

Ricardo and Delia? 😀

[ricardo 7,384]

Just now, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

I'm not convinced 🤔

Who would be President and Prime Minister of this sovereign nation called Greater Norwich?

Ricardo and Delia? 😀

I gratefully accept the chains of office😀

One or two on here might find themselves headed for the Garboldisham Gulag.

[Yellow Fever 3,767]

I put this thread up principally because

a) There wasn't an obvious one

and

b) I was irritated on the day by the news being all about Harry and Megan followed by D of E as opposed to any of the many more important stories that actually effect the rest of us.

So far I've seen many who like me would be happy to see the monarchy pass into history but nobody, just nobody has risen to defend it !

"The Royal Family - Does Anybody Care ?"

Seems like we have our answer! No.

[How I Wrote Elastic Man 1,187]

12 minutes ago, ricardo said:

I gratefully accept the chains of office😀

One or two on here might find themselves headed for the Garboldisham Gulag.

You would need to establish if they were genuine citizens of Greater Norwich 

Can they pronounce "Garboldisham",  "Happisburgh" or "Costessey" properly? 😀

[ricardo 7,384]

12 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

So far I've seen many who like me would be happy to see the monarchy pass into history but nobody, just nobody has risen to defend it !

 

Its because they don't have to. The chances of the UK becoming a Republic anytime soon are essentially nil.

[Yellow Fever 3,767]

10 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Its because they don't have to. The chances of the UK becoming a Republic anytime soon are essentially nil.

Maybe but still nobody has defended or made a positive case for it. That's telling,

We don't care about it.

[sonyc 5,510]

16 minutes ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

You would need to establish if they were genuine citizens of Greater Norwich 

Can they pronounce "Garboldisham",  "Happisburgh" or "Costessey" properly? 😀

Or Windum😏

 

[ricardo 7,384]

24 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Maybe but still nobody has defended or made a positive case for it. That's telling,

We don't care about it.

That's why there is no desire to change.

[Yellow Fever 3,767]

Just now, ricardo said:

That's why there is no desire to change.

Irrelevance and worse indifference is deadly to them long term. Their support at present resides mainly in the elderly not with the youngsters.

[ricardo 7,384]

13 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Irrelevance and worse indifference is deadly to them long term. Their support at present resides mainly in the elderly not with the youngsters

I hear a similar argument every time there's an election.

[Yellow Fever 3,767]

4 minutes ago, ricardo said:

I hear a similar argument every time there's an election.

I suspect the more elderly identify with the Queen - WW2 and all that.

How will Charles and Queen Camilla come across ?

[ricardo 7,384]

7 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I suspect the more elderly identify with the Queen - WW2 and all that.

How will Charles and Queen Camilla come across ?

They are getting on in years also. I expect the focus will be on William and Kate.

I really don't detect any great desire to move to an elected head of state. Trump is a handy lesson in being careful what you wish for.

[Yellow Fever 3,767]

4 minutes ago, ricardo said:

They are getting on in years also. I expect the focus will be on William and Kate.

I really don't detect any great desire to move to an elected head of state. Trump is a handy lesson in being careful what you wish for.

That's what the family wants but you don't get to choose in an hereditary system. Pre Internet Charles and Camilla it will be.

[ricardo 7,384]

4 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

That's what the family wants but you don't get to choose in an hereditary system. Pre Internet Charles and Camilla it will be.

It's a manufactured argument. There is no pressing need for change and I don't see it as something likely to happen on any conceivable timescale. There are innumerable opinion polls that support this view.

[NFN FC 1,123]

1 hour ago, sonyc said:

Or Windum😏

 

There's no I in Wndum! 

[Herman 9,754]

Do you think the royals are an anachronism or do you think they are still relevant?

[Mr Angry 1,554]

8 hours ago, kick it off said:

Public service?! I'll tell you what, pay me £37million per year and bestow ridiculous amounts of land and properties upon me for literally no reason, and I will give you far better value than both of them combined.

Their "public service" is to live a life of luxury, whilst doing pretty much **** all for it. Few photo ops, open a hospital occassionally, take a nice taxpayer funded holiday a couple of times per year. That is literally it.

That's not "public service", it's luxury benefits.

Neither of them have done a day's work in their lives.

**** the lot of them. Pointless parasites that give nothing to society apart from antiquated "tradition".

Obviously Philip’s 6 years service in World War 2 isn’t work then?

[kick it off 1,948]

6 minutes ago, Mr Angry said:

Obviously Philip’s 6 years service in World War 2 isn’t work then?

I'll take that, fair enough. There's plenty who served who haven't sponged hundreds of millions off the taxpayer for 75 years afterwards but you're right he did serve and it was active duty, like Harry (as opposed to William poncing around stealing army helicopters to go and visit Kate).

Edited February 22, 2021 by kick it off

[Rock The Boat 1,329]

6 hours ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

I don't wish any ill upon them, but I have no time for them, generally. I think The Queen has performed her role well, though 

I prefer a more egalitarian society. We have a day in Iceland where the Icelandic language is celebrated. The year before last, there was a reception at a local hall with some bands playing. I went along, wandered in (no checks, no security) picked up a glass of wine (no questions asked, no charge) and went and stood at a table. I looked over to the table next to me, there was a group of people talking, including the President and Prime Minister 

This wouldn't happen in the UK. To be fair, it couldn't happen.

 

 

To be fair, in the UK you couldn't have a day where the English language was celebrated, Somebody would be calling it racist.

[Yellow Fever 3,767]

12 hours ago, ricardo said:

It's a manufactured argument. There is no pressing need for change and I don't see it as something likely to happen on any conceivable timescale. There are innumerable opinion polls that support this view.

I agree it won't change quickly - possibly after Charles.

They are in the interim demeaned to be a soap opera - fodder for the red-top gossip rags alongside other minor celebrities.

[Barbe bleu 822]

17 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Maybe but still nobody has defended or made a positive case for it. That's telling,

We don't care about it.

The momarchy is there for cohesion, aspiration, diplomacy and tourism. 

The Supreme Court has assumed the role of guardian of the constitution.

Whether it does the job well or not is a matter of personal opinion

[Herman 9,754]

Aspiration?? 

[Barbe bleu 822]

4 minutes ago, Herman said:

Aspiration?? 

Not in the sense that we can belong to the family but through the honours system, royal visits etc the is a thread that can link us to the Crown and it is/should be (delete to personal opinion) a thread that can inspire us to be publicly spirited.

 

 

[Yellow Fever 3,767]

1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:

Not in the sense that we can belong to the family but through the honours system, royal visits etc the is a thread that can link us to the Crown and it is/should be (delete to personal opinion) a thread that can inspire us to be publicly spirited.

 

 

There you loose me BB. I don't have any 'aspiration' for or to be led by them; I don't think they are better or morally superior (and as a family clearly often less) than me. They don't in any tangible manner represent me. That's why I started this thread - what was all the endless news about Harry and Meg - who cares - just another pointless celebrity couple like the Kardashians. Public spirited - far more deserving people who do true charity work unpaid and unsung.

A state honour is a state honour however given (and preferably not those for being just in the 'Royal Circle' of lady this or that of the stool) as is a visit by the PM etc.

Tourism perhaps but so is Blackpool or Disney land and Micky Mouse. 

As to 'defender of the faiths(s) erh ? Or as a defender of the constitution - no, obviously doesn't do that either.

So what does it do? How does it make this country better overall as opposed to hold it back ?

None of this isn't saying current Queen doesn't do a good ceremonial only job but leave it a that - it's the institution at large that's the issue and all the baggage that goes with it.

Edited February 23, 2021 by Yellow Fever
Actually, I suspect many monarchists are actually suffering from a type of 'Stockholm' syndrome!

[horsefly 4,297]

29 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

There you loose me BB. I don't have any 'aspiration' for or to be led by them; I don't think they are better or morally superior (and as a family clearly often less) than me. They don't in any tangible manner represent me. That's why I started this thread - what was all the endless news about Harry and Meg - who cares - just another pointless celebrity couple like the Kardashians. Public spirited - far more deserving people who do true charity work unpaid and unsung.

A state honour is a state honour however given (and preferably not those for being just in the 'Royal Circle' of lady this or that of the stool) as is a visit by the PM etc.

Tourism perhaps but so is Blackpool or Disney land and Micky Mouse. 

As to 'defender of the faiths(s) erh ? Or as a defender of the constitution - no, obviously doesn't do that either.

So what does it do? How does it make this country better overall as opposed to hold it back ?

None of this isn't saying current Queen doesn't do a good ceremonial only job but leave it a that - it's the institution at large that's the issue and all the baggage that goes with it.

Spot on! We are supposed to be one of the oldest democracies in the world yet we remain infantilised by having a monarch as head of state and an unelected second chamber. Both of those things are in contradiction to the idea of a fully developed democracy. Time to grow up!

[Barbe bleu 822]

40 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

 

None of this isn't saying current Queen doesn't do a good ceremonial only job but leave it a that - it's the institution at large that's the issue and all the baggage that goes with it.

I suspect that the number of people who want the crown to have anything more than a ceremonial role is vanishingly small and the number who think it now has more than a ceremonial role is smaller still.

If we swept the whole edifice away we would need to replace it in some form.  Diplomacy still needs to be done,  worthy hands need to be (redacted during covid),   gongs need to be pinned on and tourists need to be attracted.

I am not convinced that anyone else would do the job better so I can't really see the point in changing how we do it.

This is, of course, not the same as saying that no economies can or should be made

 

 

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

17 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Spot on! We are supposed to be one of the oldest democracies in the world yet we remain infantilised by having a monarch as head of state and an unelected second chamber. Both of those things are in contradiction to the idea of a fully developed democracy. Time to grow up!

Exactly this, and add in our lack of a formal/written constitution and our antiquated ineffective electoral system and we are actually a million miles away from a fully developed democracy.

[Mr Angry 1,554]

17 hours ago, kick it off said:

I'll take that, fair enough. There's plenty who served who haven't sponged hundreds of millions off the taxpayer for 75 years afterwards but you're right he did serve and it was active duty, like Harry (as opposed to William poncing around stealing army helicopters to go and visit Kate).

BTW I used to hate the royal family-on Charles’ and Di’s wedding day I was furiously writing anti-monarchy lyrics to songs that never saw the light of day. I have mellowed since then, mainly due to the fact that Wills and Harry seem to be a bit more normal.

[Bill 1,788]

40 minutes ago, Mr Angry said:

BTW I used to hate the royal family-on Charles’ and Di’s wedding day I was furiously writing anti-monarchy lyrics to songs that never saw the light of day. I have mellowed since then, mainly due to the fact that Wills and Harry seem to be a bit more normal.

something in the genes, perhaps ?

Edited February 23, 2021 by Bill

[Haus 259]

Its the whole idea of it I dont like, the statement it makes having a royal family that some people are born better than other people.