Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Should we abolish the monarchy?

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lonelyknight)
    Ermmmm ... no.



    BIB: And what evidence is there of that? The Queen is a massive part of our culture. She's known all around the world, and she's loved and respected by many people, myself included. Her family is rooted in history. To take that away is to take away a large section of our culture.

    Look at the crowd turn out and the public interest in the Royal wedding. Something that brings so many people together, including people from across the world, all united in just seeing two people getting wed, can hardly be a bad thing, can it? and it shows just how popular they actually are.
    I live in London and I've got family in Windsor so I know a little bit about the tourism industry surrounding the royal family. Ask yourself one simple question: do the tourists actually get to see the queen? No. They take pictures of the buildings, the guards, the pay entrance fees to visit the castles etc... We can still have all that without the queen. Do you think that if we abolished the monarchy people would just stop visiting these castles and sites? Hint hint: just look at France. They get more tourists visiting their castles and monuments.

    Yeah, the media made it LOOK like everyone was happy during the royal wedding because the cops arrested people who were planning a protest and detained them for the duration of the ceremony (which is ILLEGAL by the way but of course, nobody expects the government or the police to obey the law anymore.) Would you rather pay for rich people to get married or would you rather that money be used to build roads, schools, hospitals, educate our kids, fight crime, poverty, disease, etc...

    It's a no-brainer.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    LOL! The "Official Website of the Royal Family"!

    What are the chances that information is biased?

    That's right! 100%!
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The Royal Estate would make a profit regardless of who actually ran it; it'd be hard not to make a profit from the Royal Estate.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'm tired of having this debate. The current system works perfectly - the Queen has performed her political role with unwavering commitment and duty for 50 years, you'd want to throw that away? Imagine an elected head of state... we'd end up with a faceless Nick Clegg type politician ever 5 years, I can't think of anything worse.

    The crown works very well and roots us in our cultural heritage, which I believe is very important - so much of "old Britain" is dead, having an ancient institution at the very heart of the state is a very valuable thing.

    I don't agree that they should have any powers, their various different mansions should be given to the National Trust (they can keep Buckingham Palace)... but to axe the entire of the Crown would be a grave mistake.
    • 8 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    LOL! The "Official Website of the Royal Family"!

    What are the chances that information is biased?

    That's right! 100%!
    Well you wanted a source, if you don't like it you're welcome to look for an alternative yourself.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by karateworm)
    I'm tired of having this debate. The current system works perfectly - the Queen has performed her political role with unwavering commitment and duty for 50 years, you'd want to throw that away? Imagine an elected head of state... we'd end up with a faceless Nick Clegg type politician ever 5 years, I can't think of anything worse.

    The crown works very well and roots us in our cultural heritage, which I believe is very important - so much of "old Britain" is dead, having an ancient institution at the very heart of the state is a very valuable thing.

    I don't agree that they should have any powers, their various different mansions should be given to the National Trust (they can keep Buckingham Palace)... but to axe the entire of the Crown would be a grave mistake.
    Still not one convincing argument in this thread other than "it's our tradition".

    So is slavery, imperialism and genocide.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    At the end of the day, she's a constant. Politicians come and go, but the monarch is a method of maintaining some stability. Do you really think that a president would cost us that much less? The monarch is a non political figure that, monarchy/republican debate aside, we can all unite behind when necessary. As for the tradition argument, I agree with karateworm - the argumetn isn't as weightless as you make it out to be.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    I live in London and I've got family in Windsor so I know a little bit about the tourism industry surrounding the royal family. Ask yourself one simple question: do the tourists actually get to see the queen? No. They take pictures of the buildings, the guards, the pay entrance fees to visit the castles etc... We can still have all that without the queen. Do you think that if we abolished the monarchy people would just stop visiting these castles and sites? Hint hint: just look at France. They get more tourists visiting their castles and monuments.

    Yeah, the media made it LOOK like everyone was happy during the royal wedding because the cops arrested people who were planning a protest and detained them for the duration of the ceremony (which is ILLEGAL by the when but nobody expects the government or the police to obey the law anyway.) Would you rather pay for rich people to get married or would you rather that money be used to build roads, schools, hospitals, educate our kids, fight crime, poverty, disease, etc...

    It's a no-brainer.
    True, they don't get to see the Queen. But that's not the point. They come here to see the things TO DO WITH the Queen. And that's a whole lot more exciting if the Queen/Monarchy is still living and breathing.

    What harm does the Queen actually do? If it ain't broken, don't fix it. The monarchy is rooted in history, and that fact that it still lives today, IMO, is pretty fantastic and something to be proud of.
    "rich people to get married". Lol. It's not just two rich people. It's two people that everyone knows, that LOTS of people have respect for. Why do you think people say "i'll die for Queen and country"?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    I live in London and I've got family in Windsor so I know a little bit about the tourism industry surrounding the royal family. Ask yourself one simple question: do the tourists actually get to see the queen? No. They take pictures of the buildings, the guards, the pay entrance fees to visit the castles etc... We can still have all that without the queen. Do you think that if we abolished the monarchy people would just stop visiting these castles and sites? Hint hint: just look at France. They get more tourists visiting their castles and monuments.

    Yeah, the media made it LOOK like everyone was happy during the royal wedding because the cops arrested people who were planning a protest and detained them for the duration of the ceremony (which is ILLEGAL by the way but of course, nobody expects the government or the police to obey the law anymore.) Would you rather pay for rich people to get married or would you rather that money be used to build roads, schools, hospitals, educate our kids, fight crime, poverty, disease, etc...

    It's a no-brainer.
    I'm interested to know where you get your left-wing bull**** from.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Its a good safeguard.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    This x >9000.

    Most people are dumb. Not really a surprise either. If you can convince people of Santa and a virgin birth what can't you convince them of!

    Sometimes I want to move to France... But I love this country too much in spite of the many morons that inhabit it.
    Nearly everybody uses homeopathy in in France...
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lonelyknight)
    True, they don't get to see the Queen. But that's not the point. They come here to see the things TO DO WITH the Queen. And that's a whole lot more exciting if the Queen/Monarchy is still living and breathing.

    What harm does the Queen actually do? If it ain't broken, don't fix it. The monarchy is rooted in history, and that fact that it still lives today, IMO, is pretty fantastic and something to be proud of.
    "rich people to get married". Lol. It's not just two rich people. It's two people that everyone knows, that LOTS of people have respect for.
    If that's true then why does France get more tourism than London?

    Look, I have nothing personally against the royals. I've never had the pleasure of meeting them so I can't say what sort of people they are. But they are just people. Like anyone else. Just because they're born into wealth and power doesn't mean they deserve any respect or admiration. Respect is EARNED it is not inherited.

    The royal family are just like Hollywood celebs. Everyone thinks they "know" them. But they just see them on TV and in magazines.

    (Original post by lonelyknight)
    Why do you think people say "i'll die for Queen and country"?
    Because they're RETARDS! Seriously, there's no other way of putting it. Dying for a cause or an ideal is one thing. But dying for a piece of land or an unelected rich person that you've never even met is retarded.

    Some people are just born to follow I guess...
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The OP is an excellent argument against democracy. The day people like that get their hands on our government is the day we put the final nail in the coffin of the constitution.

    Do we know what the consequences of abolishing the monarchy will be?

    No. It doesn't matter how much brilliance, how much culture, how much continental presumption we have: nobody can know the causal links between something as intricately complicated as the institution of monarchy and the rest of society.

    Let's have some humility and focus on what we can know. We can know the likely consequences of tinkering with the constitution ever so delicately here and there. The constitution as it now exists is the product of centuries of such tinkering: reforming it in the way you suggest would swap knowledge for ignorance, understanding for guesswork, and plunge us all into darkness. Republicans are, as a rule, people who have given five minutes' thought to questions that have perplexed mankind's greatest thinkers for millenia and think that earns them the right to be taken seriously. The best cure for people affected by this odious condition is the inculcation of some good old fashioned common sense. Failing that there's always the baton and the right shield.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    It's a rhetorical question really... I mean, of course we should!

    What I'm really asking is for any pro-monarchist to try to JUSTIFY the existence of an unelected, taxpayer funded, hereditary power structure in a post-modern democratic country.

    And before you start saying "b-bb-but she brings in a lot of money from tourism etc..." We all know that's bull****. Tourists come here for the culture, the shopping, the sights, etc... Not to see the queen. Those pretty buildings will still be here after we've gotten rid of the monarchy and the history and culture will remain forever as well.

    Example: More tourists visit Paris than London each year and we all know what the French did to their aristocratic oppressors... Game over monarchists!

    Another example of the extreme hypocrisy of monarchists is that they are so quick to criticize the "welfare culture" and "benefit scum" in this country. Did they not get the memo? The royal family are the BIGGEST welfare recipients in the WORLD! Why aren't our politicians DENOUNCING these scroungers?

    Oh, that's right... Our politicians only care about the rich! Wow! What a ****ing surprise!
    Not saying that I am a supporter but why are you against them in the first place?
    Tourists come here for the culture, but a fair portion of the culture is derived from the history of the country (I don't understand why you can't appreciate that link between history and culture) and our history is very much about how King George <insert number> trotted around and did this and that while Queen Elizabeth <insert number> tended to <insert generic classical name>

    If its equality you're trying to achieve by being anti-monarchist then forget it, one less monarch in this world is not going to achieve anything and is hardly a drop in the ocean of the super wealthy.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JacobW)
    The OP is an excellent argument against democracy. The day people like that get their hands on our government is the day we put the final nail in the coffin of the constitution.
    Oh look! Another little right-wing Nazi who hates democracy.

    Run along now. You'll be late for your EDL meeting!
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bulgy)
    because without their ancestors britain woulndn't be a tenth what it is today
    What a ridiculous reply.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    It's a rhetorical question really... I mean, of course we should!

    What I'm really asking is for any pro-monarchist to try to JUSTIFY the existence of an unelected, taxpayer funded, hereditary power structure in a post-modern democratic country.

    And before you start saying "b-bb-but she brings in a lot of money from tourism etc..." We all know that's bull****. Tourists come here for the culture, the shopping, the sights, etc... Not to see the queen. Those pretty buildings will still be here after we've gotten rid of the monarchy and the history and culture will remain forever as well.

    Example: More tourists visit Paris than London each year and we all know what the French did to their aristocratic oppressors... Game over monarchists!

    Another example of the extreme hypocrisy of monarchists is that they are so quick to criticize the "welfare culture" and "benefit scum" in this country. Did they not get the memo? The royal family are the BIGGEST welfare recipients in the WORLD! Why aren't our politicians DENOUNCING these scroungers?

    Oh, that's right... Our politicians only care about the rich! Wow! What a ****ing surprise!
    The Queen is independently wealthy and less open to corruption and the formation of bias.

    In her role it is mainly advisory and diplomacy. Having a lifetime experience is much more important in these roles than a head of state who is only there for 5 years.

    Screw tourism, it's our history and heritage. Who would want to become a faceless, white-washed state anyway? Our tradition is just enough to stop us being a complete boring mess.

    So, what are the arguments for abolishing the monarchy? I don't want to hear anything like 'tax blah blah'. It has been shown that a President could cost just as much. I mean, look at Sarkozy
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by When you see it...)
    What a ridiculous reply.
    Usually you are meant to have offered something better or a rebuttal when you say that
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    Oh look! Another little right-wing Nazi who hates democracy.

    Run along now. You'll be late for your EDL meeting!
    How infantile.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JacobW)
    How infantile.
    Well what do you expect when you criticize democracy and defend hereditary power? You've lost all credibility with civilized people around the world.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: February 29, 2012
New on TSR

The future of apprenticeships

Join the discussion in the apprenticeships hub!

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.