Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr Sparkles)
    Well that's like saying Angelina Jolie is powerful. Yes she's mega famous and all the rest of it. But what could she actually do to affect the world? Not much. The most she could do is use her PR to try and influence people - she could hardly pass laws.

    Again, why you would want to replace her with someone who would rule out of self-interest with supreme power beggars belief. Just because they are elected it's OK if they lie, steal, cheat, commit fraud, ruin the country, are undemocratic, because people voted for them? Nice one!
    That's a fallacious argument; Angelina Jolie is not the Queen!

    The laws are for the masses! Do you not understand this? The laws are for the masses. That's all. She doesn't have to pass laws. That's the point. She has people; her officials - do it for her. The point of the monarchy, in this case, is that she doesn't have to pass any laws; she has handed power over to the masses, whom they appoint certain individuals to establish a parliament whereby laws are made in keeping with what she represents; Justice. That's what she represents. She is the iconic symbol of the Justice system. As if that wasn't enough; she is appointed divine which makes her absolute sovereign and, as I have mentioned, "upholder of the faith". She rules as head of state for the "holy Orders" of which she and her family are connected all the way to the Papacy of which she is deferential to.

    What I am getting at here is that there is a structure in place; a hierarchy of power. The papacy (the Highest Order/Catholic Church); the fuedal system (at one time) or the monarchy (as now); the parliament and the Anglican Church (for the masses/socialism/Christianity).

    A three tiered structure of power.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Democratic theory is not absolutist. To be a democracy does not involve every element of a country's government being elected - it'd be ridiculous if it did. Frankly I think your point is bull-****.
    I never said that it did, but the Queen is the person who chooses the government and has the power to declare war - she also represents our country to the rest of the world. I think it should be our right as citizens to choose the person who is at the very top of the system. In fact, it would be nice if we could really call ourselves 'citizens' rather than subjects.

    As for your other comment, that remark was made in jest and also to point out that the idea of a stable monarchy guiding Britain through all its history is nonsense. They are not quintessentially English or British, they are no different than anyone else. Why should they be given powers over the rest of us?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by near_comatose)
    You're a complete frube, and the queen doesn't command very much respect at all with the <30s in this country
    I never said she did, I said she should.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jeremy_Whiskers)
    Clearly that's under self-arbitration. I don't see your point, i'm simply noting duration is abstract from desirability.
    When I said 'It worked fine for hundreds of years' I wasn't suggesting that it's duration was a strength, I was saying that it works fine, the hundreds of years is evidence of for example the medieval period, when it worked fine.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cesare Borgia)
    When I said 'It worked fine for hundreds of years' I wasn't suggesting that it's duration was a strength, I was saying that it works fine, the hundreds of years is evidence of for example the medieval period, when it worked fine.
    Clearly it worked fine under your own perceptions, that's what's up for debate, i'd disagree that it 'worked fine'..
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underwood94)
    In fact, it would be nice if we could really call ourselves 'citizens' rather than subjects.
    It would be nice but it wouldn't be accurate. I think the term "subject" is mainly used in matters of the law nowadays.

    Imagine if the State was a beehive and our Queen (Queen Elizabeth) was Queen bee. The workers; the drones and what-have-you would not be considered citizens of the state-beehive in relation to the Queen bee - but only in relation to the members of the hive. The Queen is absolute in the hive - she is sovereign - and so she is above her "citizens", thus to her the rest of the hive are technically her subjects.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Yey.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jeremy_Whiskers)
    Clearly it worked fine under your own perceptions, that's what's up for debate, i'd disagree that it 'worked fine'..
    How has the world improved with the widespread downfall of monarchism?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    The subject remember is the who.

    You and me, in other words. We are citizens of the bee-hive state; but we will always be the Queen's subjects.
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by L i b)
    That is absolute nonsense.
    thanks for the neg rep

    EDIT
    Leave your name next time
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yay, part of our heritage
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    ney
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yay.

    They do a lot of work and are great for this country. They also cost the taxpayer just £3 each per year. Bargain.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i swore my allegiance to the queen and i belive fully that we should keep the monachy and they do so much for this country we need to keep them.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    God save the Queen
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    It would be nice but it wouldn't be accurate. I think the term "subject" is mainly used in matters of the law nowadays.

    Imagine if the State was a beehive and our Queen (Queen Elizabeth) was Queen bee. The workers; the drones and what-have-you would not be considered citizens of the state-beehive in relation to the Queen bee - but only in relation to the members of the hive. The Queen is absolute in the hive - she is sovereign - and so she is above her "citizens", thus to her the rest of the hive are technically her subjects.
    Are you an atheist? If not, which religion? If you are this applies to you:

    How can you believe in freemasonry? Freemasonry conspiracies theories consist of a ruler of the world e.g. devil worshiping and to have a devil you need to have a god. Anyway, let me guess... Queen going to be a reptilian and the bildberg group are going to unite the world with a government and obama will chant his famous line "Yes we can", for the whole world but he is saying "thank you Satan". The thing is I have heard all of this and the thing that is not told is what is going to happen when countries unite? How will it affect us? Wouldn't it stop wars? Or start galactic wars?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jonjon123)
    Are you an atheist? If not, which religion? If you are this applies to you:

    How can you believe in freemasonry? Freemasonry conspiracies theories consist of a ruler of the world e.g. devil worshiping and to have a devil you need to have a god. Anyway, let me guess... Queen going to be a reptilian and the bildberg group are going to unite the world with a government and obama will chant his famous line "Yes we can", for the whole world but he is saying "thank you Satan". The thing is I have heard all of this and the thing that is not told is what is going to happen when countries unite? How will it affect us? Wouldn't it stop wars? Or start galactic wars?
    For the purposes of identifying a position I am an atheist.

    How can I believe in freemasonry? It has nothing to do with belief. Freemasons are real; they exist. You don't need to believe.

    I hope that helps.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    And, btw, I do not believe the Queen is a reptile. The Bilderberg group do exist - no belief required - and they meet to discuss world plans. That's a fact. No belief required.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    And, btw, I do not believe the Queen is a reptile. The Bilderberg group do exist - no belief required - and they meet to discuss world plans. That's a fact. No belief required.
    Ok, I know they exsist. Ok. But how will this affect us? What will it do to you and me? Wouldn't it stop wars?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Aye, as the Monarch is the keystone of our political system
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.