Monarchist or Republican?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,606]

2 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

One is clearly a hate crime etc.  Existing laws can deal with verbal abuse (verbal abuse & harassment).

What happened to the protesters was something else.

It's only a hate crime because it has been defined as such in law. Fundamentally it's non-violent protest against something that doesn't damage any people or property.

Edited May 16, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,844]

10 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

One is clearly a hate crime etc.  Existing laws can deal with verbal abuse (verbal abuse & harassment).

What happened to the protesters was something else.

I think 99.999999% of people can see this quite clearly. 👍

[littleyellowbirdie 2,606]

1 minute ago, Herman said:

I think 99.999999% of people can see this quite clearly. 👍

I can see it perfectly clearly: A hate crime is a legal construct characterising a form of non-violent expression as a crime, based on either race or cultural values of the target.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,606]

17 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

There can never be freedom of speech. For example, its not on to publicly give away someone's secrets or skeletons, or to accuse them of something that is patently untrue.

Protest is something different though. By not turning up on masse to watch Norwich after a social post is not violent, rude, untrue or anti social. It might spoil the game and hurt the club but it is nevertheless a right to abstain from something that isn't compulsory.

As in everything in life, there are exceptions to all rules. And personal choice is valid. For instance, in Cornwall, there is more protest about Devonians putting the jam on top of the cream than the eprformance of our local MP. Its annoying to many but important to others.

I believe there may have been incidents that could have occurred at the Coronation. But I am also disturbed that there appears to be acceptance that the police can act to stop people blowing whistles just because it suits also. What next? You must not say you agree with Sinn Fein? 

Braverman is pushing an agenda that, apart from her own ambitions, chooses to single out issues that suit her and sympathisers rather than a modern society.

 

'Modern society' is still broadly in favour of the continuation of the monarchy.

Edited May 16, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[canarydan23 4,067]

12 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I can see it perfectly clearly: A hate crime is a legal construct characterising a form of non-violent expression as a crime, based on either race or cultural values of the target.

No it isn't.

In fact, I'm stopping there. You're either being deliberately stupid for the reactions, in which case I'll stop feeding the troll, or you are that thick that engaging with you is tantamount to engaging with a brick, in which case there's no point.

[Mello Yello 2,307]

Antichrist or Reptilian?.....

[littleyellowbirdie 2,606]

15 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

No it isn't.

In fact, I'm stopping there. You're either being deliberately stupid for the reactions, in which case I'll stop feeding the troll, or you are that thick that engaging with you is tantamount to engaging with a brick, in which case there's no point.

From the Metropolitan police... (boooo, hisss)

https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/hco/hate-crime/what-is-hate-crime/

Quote

A hate incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someone’s prejudice towards them because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender.

A lot of that crosses over into questions of personal identity, and affiliation to the monarchy definitely counts as something I consider to be part of my cultural identity.

I've sat having drinks with friends who'd rather not have a monarchy, but at the same time they're respectful and tolerant of the fact that I like the monarchy, and accepting that the majority of people are still in favour of it. In contrast, those insisting in getting in the faces of those out enjoying it are being deliberately antagonistic. Legally, what the protesters are doing isn't a hate crime, but it does actually have a lot of characteristics in common with hate crimes in that there's a clear motivation to antagonise those out for the occasion targeting them based on their beliefs and values.

Edited May 16, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,844]

16 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

No it isn't.

In fact, I'm stopping there. You're either being deliberately stupid for the reactions, in which case I'll stop feeding the troll, or you are that thick that engaging with you is tantamount to engaging with a brick, in which case there's no point.

People have tried to engage him in polite discourse but he's talking absolute nonsense. He knows it and we know it. Am oot.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,606]

3 minutes ago, Herman said:

People have tried to engage him in polite discourse but he's talking absolute nonsense. He knows it and we know it. Am oot.

it's not nonsense; you just don't agree with my point of view. All of you take for granted the consensus in favour of protest is dependent on the support of many of the people aggravated by the protesters though.

Edited May 16, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

'Modern society' is still broadly in favour of the continuation of the monarchy.

Except more 18-24 year olds would prefer an elected head of state. That is modern enough for me.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,838]

16 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Except more 18-24 year olds would prefer an elected head of state. That is modern enough for me.

Good thing 18-24 year olds don't make up the entire population of a country then

[canarydan23 4,067]

1 hour ago, Herman said:

People have tried to engage him in polite discourse but he's talking absolute nonsense. He knows it and we know it. Am oot.

Yep, stark raving lunatic or just a troll. There is no other feasible alternative.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,606]

47 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Except more 18-24 year olds would prefer an elected head of state. That is modern enough for me.

How old are you, out of curiosity? Aren't you treading on thin ice a bit disenfranchising your peers from society because a section of them have views you personally don't agree with? What happens when the younger generation have views that you are at odds with?

Edited May 16, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,606]

19 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Yep, stark raving lunatic or just a troll. There is no other feasible alternative.

Even if I was a troll, should that be considered a problem in a society where protest mostly in the name of just p1ss1ng off people enjoying a holiday is considered a worthy  cause while the subject of continuation of monarchy is already a regular topic for discussion in media and online?

[Barbe bleu 834]

I quite liked the coronation. A bit long and flat in parts, but a good state occasion and diversion nonetheless. I'm glad it wasn't spoiled but a tiny number of attention seeking people using the efforts of others to highlight their minority campaign.

Sounds to me like the police did make the wrong call in a few things but I think their assessment of the capability and intent of the guys from 'Republic' was one to which they were entitled at the time.

Event not disrupted and Republic have got more publicity than they could possibly hope from some placards so no major damage done.

I'm not worried about how this translates to the right to protest in general as it concerns a set of circumstances not seen in this country for 70 years and unlikely to be seen in the next decade or 2.

[Nuff Said 5,199]

Make your own mind up about which is which out of LYB, Barbe bleu and RTB

 

[sonyc 5,541]

8 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Make your own mind up about which is which out of LYB, Barbe bleu and RTB

 

Barbe Bleu (sic.....should be 'Bleue' as I've mentioned to him before) is a translation of course of Bluebeard, who was a rich bloke who had many wives (six?) and he went away leaving his current wife all the keys to the castle. She was forbidden to open one of the keys to a door. But...she disobeyed and found the bodies of all his former wives in the locked room. French folktale. It's rather a grim nom de plume you could say!

 

Rock the Boat means to say something or do something to disturb or upset people. But I far prefer the musical version  by the Hues Corporation (sometimes it's an earworm when I read his posts "....so I'd like to know where you got the notion, said I'd like to know where you got the notion....to rock the boat, don't rock the boat baby..."😅

There....you'll blame me now for singing that all afternoon 😊

Let me rock the boat by posting the music in the wrong thread...I've now tipped the boat over! Great song.

 

Edited May 17, 2023 by sonyc
Nom de plume... doh

[Nuff Said 5,199]

10 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Barbe Bleu (sic.....should be 'Bleue' as I've mentioned to him before) is a translation of course of Bluebeard, who was a rich bloke who had many wives (six?) and he went away leaving his current wife all the keys to the castle. She was forbidden to open one of the keys to a door. But...she disobeyed and found the bodies of all his former wives in the locked room. French folktale. It's rather a grim nomme de plume you could say!

 

Rock the Boat means to say something or do something to disturb or upset people. But I far prefer the musical version  by the Hues Corporation (sometimes it's an earworm when I read his posts "....so I'd like to know where you got the notion, said I'd like to know where you got the notion....to rock the boat, don't rock the boat baby..."😅

There....you'll blame me now for singing that all afternoon 😊

Let me rock the boat by posting the music in the wrong thread...I've now tipped the boat over! Great song.

 

You’re not wrong about the ear worm. They don’t make them like that any more!

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

19 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

How old are you, out of curiosity? Aren't you treading on thin ice a bit disenfranchising your peers from society because a section of them have views you personally don't agree with? What happens when the younger generation have views that you are at odds with?

I am 72. I have merely pointed out that the term modern is probably more suited to 18-24 year olds than someone in my age group who was born when we had a King not a Queen.

I assume you are younger than me and I am quite often at odds with you. Its not exclusive to Republicans or Monarchists. Surely many of those 18-24 year olds are likely to put up a better argument for an elected head than a Monarch than you or Cambridge.

Mind you if Republicans become the majority, Cambridge is likely to join us.

[Creative Midfielder 2,003]

28 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

I am 72. I have merely pointed out that the term modern is probably more suited to 18-24 year olds than someone in my age group who was born when we had a King not a Queen.

I assume you are younger than me and I am quite often at odds with you. Its not exclusive to Republicans or Monarchists. Surely many of those 18-24 year olds are likely to put up a better argument for an elected head than a Monarch than you or Cambridge.

Mind you if Republicans become the majority, Cambridge is likely to join us.

I think it is more a case of when rather than if, much like Scottish Independence, Irish unification and indeed us rejoining the EU - all are very likely to happen eventually but impossible to predict when with any great accuracy.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

51 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

I think it is more a case of when rather than if, much like Scottish Independence, Irish unification and indeed us rejoining the EU - all are very likely to happen eventually but impossible to predict when with any great accuracy.

I'm in for all three.

[Nuff Said 5,199]

5 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

I think it is more a case of when rather than if, much like Scottish Independence, Irish unification and indeed us rejoining the EU - all are very likely to happen eventually but impossible to predict when with any great accuracy.

Not sure about Scottish independence. I think its peak may have passed with the decline now accelerating of North Sea oil revenues. I get that there is probably a greater proportion of support amongst the young, but economically it makes less and less sense. 

[Nuff Said 5,199]

5 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I'm in for all three.

And if you support Scottish independence, you are condemning England (and Wales) to never-ending Tory rule. Labour need support in Scotland to have any chance of forming a government.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

11 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

And if you support Scottish independence, you are condemning England (and Wales) to never-ending Tory rule. Labour need support in Scotland to have any chance of forming a government.

That is a chance I will risk. Its up to Labour to win without the Scottish support. But we need to cut them adrift.

[dylanisabaddog 5,041]

12 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

And if you support Scottish independence, you are condemning England (and Wales) to never-ending Tory rule. Labour need support in Scotland to have any chance of forming a government.

That was the case until quite recently but not any more. The Conservatives have for many years relied on the support of the baby boom generation. As that generation was born between 1945 and 1965 they are starting to die. By 2045 they will virtually be gone but their numbers are dwindling already. Meanwhile, support for the Conservatives in the under 40 age group now stands at 14%. It used to be the case that peoples' politics changed as they got older but research suggests that doesn't happen any more. No one knows why for certain but it's clear that the better educated people are the more likely they are to vote Labour. It's also the case that record numbers of people have attended University since the Blair years (perhaps Blair knew what he was doing). 

It's also highly likely that by the time the 2030 election comes around, immigrants will be able to vote. The Labour Party isn't stupid, it's suggesting that for a reason. 

Unless the Conservative Party gets to grips with this quite quickly they will cease to exist. In fact it's possible that this could be their last ever  term in office. I very much doubt that will happen as politicians like to win elections, but it does mean that it's going to be quite possible for Labour to win in England if they adopt centrist policies. That's obviously a very big 'if'. 

[Creative Midfielder 2,003]

13 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Not sure about Scottish independence. I think its peak may have passed with the decline now accelerating of North Sea oil revenues. I get that there is probably a greater proportion of support amongst the young, but economically it makes less and less sense. 

I think it has definitely taken a dip with Nicola's resignation and all that has followed from that but suspect that the dip will be temporary.

Fair point about North Sea oil declining but bear in mind that Scotland has huge amounts (actual and potential) of wind power (both on & off shore) to replace it and could probably generate a fair bit more hydro as well if they really wanted/needed to.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,606]

On 16/05/2023 at 21:00, keelansgrandad said:

Except more 18-24 year olds would prefer an elected head of state. That is modern enough for me.

A mate of mine committed suicide a couple of weeks ago in his early 40s. My best friend's girlfriend committed suicide at 17. A 50 year old builder friend fell off a roof and died.  They're no longer part of the modern world. Expectations on remaining life is not a good basis for judging how important somebody's opinion is; if someone's alive then they're alive then they're part of the modern world until they're dead.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

49 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

A mate of mine committed suicide a couple of weeks ago in his early 40s. My best friend's girlfriend committed suicide at 17. A 50 year old builder friend fell off a roof and died.  They're no longer part of the modern world. Expectations on remaining life is not a good basis for judging how important somebody's opinion is; if someone's alive then they're alive then they're part of the modern world until they're dead.

I'm sorry about your friends but they have nothing to do with the argument. When those 18-24 year olds become parents and influence their kids, the momentum will increase. I do believe, not in my lifetime, that therecwill either be a reformed monarchy or even an elected Presidential figure.

[sonyc 5,541]

55 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

A mate of mine committed suicide a couple of weeks ago in his early 40s. My best friend's girlfriend committed suicide at 17. A 50 year old builder friend fell off a roof and died.  They're no longer part of the modern world. Expectations on remaining life is not a good basis for judging how important somebody's opinion is; if someone's alive then they're alive then they're part of the modern world until they're dead.

Really sorry to read this. Whatever anyone's views on politics, the lives of people are far more important. It's upsetting too that your friend leaves behind so many unanswered questions....very probably. And a whole family grieving too.

That's why I often think it's important as posters we are thoughtful of each other. Not because they will do something stupid but just that showing a kindness is the least we can do. 

As for the term 'modern world' I reckon it's quite subjective. You can occasionally meet some very old folk but they have the most surprisingly open minds. Likewise, some are very fixed. I tend to believe that a fixed mind is unhelpful (for me anyway) because it closes off lots of avenues. Are younger people more open minded? I'm not sure about that too.

Social media is changing access to what people read and learn. I think that society is slowly becoming more liberal. Across a whole host of issues. That's why there are so many stories emerging about abuses of power in many institutions. And the monarchy is one of those. I think that is what KG is intimating as well (and KG, an older poster, like me, though I'm about a decade behind him, is an open minded person. That's based on years of his posting history).

I don't see the monarchy going in the next hundred years. I do see it becoming less important and modernising radically in the next 20. 

[Creative Midfielder 2,003]

16 hours ago, sonyc said:

I don't see the monarchy going in the next hundred years. I do see it becoming less important and modernising radically in the next 20. 

I found this comment quite intriguing, nothing to do with the monarchy, just the timescales - I feel I've got some idea about how things generally might go in the next 20 or so years, at the absolute max 30 years but beyond that I think that everything will have changed so radically that I have absolutely no idea what anything will look like (which in many ways is a blessing).