Why is disliking the British monarchy being "anti-british"?

Scroll to see replies

Yes traveling the world in luxury, the best money can buy. writing a few speaches here and there of and giving a wave. We dont need them. Money would be better spend on other things.

Your ignorance of the constitutional function of the Sovereign is not an argument against it.

Dont give me the tourists would automaticaly stop coming to the UK BS.

Don't ****ing presume to turn me into your strawman.

Reply 61

Ewan

Original post by Left Hand Drive

Yes traveling the world in luxury, the best money can buy. writing a few speaches here and there of and giving a wave. We dont need them. Money would be better spend on other things. Dont give me the tourists would automaticaly stop coming to the UK BS.

So what would you suggest? The duties of the queen as head of state need to be carried out by someone.

Reply 62

Rant

Original post by Bellissima

me and my friend were talking about the royal wedding (well more like she was going on about how great it will be while i sat there nodding)... then she asked me what i was going to do for it... so i told her nothing, i'm not interested in it... she asked me why and i just said i don't like the royal family and i don't have any interest in a wedding of two people i don't know... i then got told that she was "shocked" that i was so anti-british and that since i'm british i should be watching... and that not liking the royal family was like not liking britain. i was actually pretty surprised that someone my age (18) felt this way, i thought it was mainly old(er) people who were really into the royal family.

i love where i live, most of the stuff about britain... i just don't like the royal family.

are there a lot of people who feel the same as my friend?

She sounds like a vapid sheep. Get rid.

Also, nationalisim's time is coming to an end. Centuries of suffering will be over with the abolition of this evil concept.

Reply 63

Bellissima

Original post by Foo.mp3

Are you an indigenous Brit or did your parents/ancestors hail from elsewhere?

i don't see why that matters? yes my ancestors did come from elsewhere, like most people in this country. it depends how far back you want to go.

Reply 64

takethyfacehence

I was having a similar conversation last night. I can't remember how it started but my friend said she didn't understand why people are negative/apathetic to the wedding and that she herself loves it and laps it all up basically. Second friend agreed and said that people should be respectful to the Royals. I said I couldn't care less and asked the second friend what difference it would make either way if I am respectful or not towards them (I am not really negative about the Royal family, just apathetic). She didn't really have a reply, oh yeah before that she said how can you not care about the future monarchs? kinda thing, I said it didn't really make a difference to me either way. If I am being ignorant to the impact that having a different person there makes I would love to be informed.

To me a lot of it is just using it as an excuse to pretend to believe in something and be excited and happy for them and whatever. But maybe this is just the impression I get from the two people I was talking to in the above paragraph, who were talking earlier in the night about getting married (one is engaged) and having kids, and seem obsessed with that atm.

Reply 65

PendulumBoB

Original post by L i b

I'm fine with ideological republicanism - I disagree with it, but that's OK. What I will object to is when people do not support the head of state - whomsoever that may be - or make unpleasant remarks towards the Queen who has devoted her life to the service of this country.

That you have chosen to object not to the institution of monarchy, but instead the Royal Family, who have given a huge amount for this country, I find utterly repugnant.

If living a life of palaces is service then where can I sign up?

Also why should we support a head of state who has not been voted in?

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 66

Democracy

Original post by PendulumBoB

Also why should we support a head of state who has not been voted in?

We shouldn't. Herein lies the basic irrationality and inferority complex of the monarchist mentality.

Reply 67

yesioo

I'll be sitting on the sofa in my Sunday best with a bag of popcorn on my lap and a box of tissues by my side! :ahee:

Spoiler

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 68

PendulumBoB

Original post by yesioo

I'll be sitting on the sofa in my Sunday best with a bag of popcorn on my lap and a box of tissues by my side! :ahee:

Spoiler

I had a certain idea about your post until I saw that you're female :colondollar:

Reply 69

yesioo

I had a certain idea about your post until I saw that you're female

I've just realized :emo:

Reply 70

Redreynard

Original post by Bellissima

i, like you, am not interested in a wedding between two people who i have nothing to do with.
she is wrong to say you are being anti-british for not wanting to watch the wedding.
but, having said that, it is probably a bit anti-british to be against the monarcy. because the monarcy, like a beautiful english village, is a quintessential part of englishness. now i guess you can disagree with certain parts of the package, but if you start disagreeing with too much, then that's clearly anti-british.
royalist have always tended to be older than republicans, for same reason that oldsters tend to worry more about law and order: older people seek security, youngsters excitement. but exciting fads come and go, who can remember blair bleating on about "cool britania" anymore, whereas lasting things, like say beefeaters, they last for hundreds of years.

Reply 71

PendulumBoB

It's not, at least it it should'nt be. These embarrassing jokes are not representitive of this nation of over 60 million people.

Reply 72

PendulumBoB

Original post by L i b

No. If the United Kingdom had a president, I'd give him due support as the head of our state and national leader even if I disagreed with his position.

Yes, it is in fact. Being King killed her father, as she well remembers. It is an enormously stressful job, and involves a complete sacrifice of any individual autonomy in service of the nation. That the Queen has private wealth is neither here nor there - I never cease to be amazed by how materialistic some people are - she has never had a life to call her own.

Surely supporting a head of state regardless of whether or not you agree with his/hers position is foolish at best and dangerous at worst.

If it killed her father either give it up or let the people vote on it every few years. Was he really as stressed as the east londoners who had nowhere after their homes were destroyed? Was he as stressed as the mother who did'nt know if her child would have a father at the end of the war?

Reply 73

L i b

Original post by PendulumBoB

If living a life of palaces is service then where can I sign up?

Also why should we support a head of state who has not been voted in?

Living in a palace is neither here nor there, nor do I think it a particularly terrific thing. If you want to sacrifice your life to be solely in the service of the nation, hand away every piece of privacy you have, be expected to work until you die, all the while socialising politely and with a smile on your face to every single one one of the hundreds of thousands of people you are likely to meet then you're very unusual indeed. It's a ****ing horrible job, and the sooner the sillier brand of left-wingers realise there's more to life than money and have the faintest understanding of life beyond their own experiences, the better.

As for your second question - because the person concerned is head of state. I don't worry too much about how judges are appointed, or members of the House of Lords, I rate them on whether they do a good job or not. I oppose having an elected head of state as it would politicise the role and indeed I see no reason why election would produce a better quality candidate - and indeed several reasons why it may well bring far worse people into the office. Democracy is a useful tool to serve the ends of good government, it is not an end in itself.

Reply 74

Bellissima

Original post by Foo.mp3

Ok, how far back? (and I'm not saying it matters in an objective/philosophical sense, just trying to understand your friend's comment). Are ye 1st, 2nd, 3rd gen? Are you ethnically white/non-white?

2 of my grandparents are british (not sure how fat back), 1 is irish and another is from continental europe, i'm white... i think if she was UKIP/BNP she'd def see me as british

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 75

thecookiemonster

Being British is eating strawberries with a bulldog sat next to you while watching wimbledon before going to play a game of cricket. Tally ho!

Reply 76

Democracy

Original post by L i b

It's a ****ing horrible job, and the sooner the sillier brand of left-wingers realise there's more to life than money and have the faintest understanding of life beyond their own experiences, the better.

If living in a palace and having untold wealth is such a chore, why doesn't HM move to a three bed semi in Sudbury like the rest of the country?

Reply 77

L i b

Original post by PendulumBoB

If it killed her father either give it up or let the people vote on it every few years. Was he really as stressed as the east londoners who had nowhere after their homes were destroyed?

His home was bombed too, remember. But yes, the man was crippingly shy and had no stomach for public appearances and socialising, yet it was an inevitable part of his job. As has been said, it's generally accepted that it hastened his death considerably.

The Queen will not abdicate because she understands the concept of duty, something which seems alien to the self-consciously modernist cynics who populate the British Republican movement.

Reply 78

L i b

Original post by Democracy

If living in a palace and having untold wealth is such a chore, why doesn't HM move to a three bed semi in Sudbury like the rest of the country?

The same reason that she doesn't move to Windsor Castle, despite apparently disliking Buckingham Palace: because it is the constitutional duty of the monarch to be seen living in that place. You can't simply decide how to live your own life when you're the monarch.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 79

Democracy

Original post by L i b

The same reason that she doesn't move to Windsor Castle, despite apparently disliking Buckingham Palace: because it is the constitutional duty of the monarch to be seen living in that place.

I refer you to the first post I made in this thread...these are nonsensical lies and irrational traditions, rooted in the monarchy's pompous self-belief in its own divinity (as I said, history confirms this). What's sad is sensible human beings falling for this nonsense in 2011.