Turn on thread page Beta

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

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bellissima)
    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
    Then I don't understand her animosity. I think most Brits accept that not everyone chums the Monarchy and Republicanism is kinda la mode du jour among certain societal/cultural elites..

    It is not un-British, but perhaps a little un-cool, to totally ignore the royal wedding but that doesn't mean anyone should be expected to be all HURRRRRRRRRRRAY!! about it.. :rolleyes:

    I think there are some good eggs in the Royals, some douches and one or two bad eggs but in general they're alright and quite good value at the end of the day.. I'm pleased for anyone who has experienced some of the things William has to have overcome them and found happiness
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well I hate the Royal Family and this country. Nothing wrong with being anti-British, in fact, it's quite sensible.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    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.
    Most people go through life struggling to pay the morgage, struggle to find a decent job some of them having good qualifications. Prince Harry didn't exactly perform well at Eton lives a life of a party animal and still has adoring fans thanks to the finely tuned propaganda machine which somehow keeps these people afloat. Who could in all honesty turn down the prospect of living in a palace, of course there are more important things and I accept that but having a home is a fundamental need and having it free of charge is even better. Furthermore you speak of having to smile for hundreds of thousands of other people, but it's a similar situation for you or I if we go to a wedding or see a friend or a job interview. The issue of privicy merely shows that they are an extension of todays celebrity culture, besides they have guards to protect them from badmen anyway.

    You make a fair and I accept that people often do not know what is good for them, but how can you really say that the royal family as a whole are doing a good job, I mean what happens when the Prime Minister of India comes here do they gag Prince Phillip? How about Merkel do they ask Harry to lock away the Nazi uniform when she comes for tea? I'm all for a bit of banter but these guys really should remember their positions of responsibilty
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    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.
    There's nothing remotely irrational about having your head of state live in a certain building in their capital city. Indeed, I get the impression that virtually every country on earth does just that. As for the Queen liking it: apparently the happiest time of the Queen's life was living as a naval captain's wife in a villa in Malta: not as a Queen, not in a palace.

    The British monarchy does not believe in the Divine Right of Kings and, with the exception of a couple of Stewarts, never has.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PendulumBoB)
    Most people go through life struggling to pay the morgage, struggle to find a decent job some of them having good qualifications.
    Virtually everyone in Britain today has a roof over their heads. I don't believe most people struggle to pay their mortgages in this day and age.

    Prince Harry didn't exactly perform well at Eton lives a life of a party animal and still has adoring fans thanks to the finely tuned propaganda machine which somehow keeps these people afloat.
    What's that got to do with anything? Prince Harry has gone on to serve in the armed forces and his life is not funded by the state. He is wealthy, and largely as a result of inherited wealth - welcome to the lot of millions of Britons.

    You make a fair and I accept that people often do not know what is good for them, but how can you really say that the royal family as a whole are doing a good job, I mean what happens when the Prime Minister of India comes here do they gag Prince Phillip? How about Merkel do they ask Harry to lock away the Nazi uniform when she comes for tea? I'm all for a bit of banter but these guys really should remember their positions of responsibilty
    As it happens, Prince Philip gets on quite well with Indian Prime Ministers. Viz:



    We poke fun at the D of E, but in reality he is a pleasant man who is well respected around the world.

    Prince Harry dressed up in a slightly inappropriate outfit for a party. I can't say it bothers me much. I hope his father gave him a telling off, but realistically it's nothing for anyone to be offended by.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    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.
    If you think it's such a horrible job (and I do agree with you here - I would hate to have to do it), why do you advocate system which effectively forces someone to do it because of the family they happen to be born into? Wouldn't it be fairer if we had a system where people entered the job voluntarily?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    you give too much thought to your retarded friends comments.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    why do you have to like to dislike someone you've no relation to

    the royal family are the ones taking you to war and killing you

    the current royal family are illegitimate

    she is a brain washed ignorant rhesus + blood type
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RadioHawk)
    i like the monarchy
    i don't care about the royal wedding....
    some girl who stalked the prince from a young age and has a HISTORY OF ART degree....

    And what's wrong with a History of Art degree...? :colonhash:
    But seriously, I will definitely watch the Royal Wedding. Mainly because it's a moment in our history. My mum is supplying drinks and nibbles
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I don't consider anti-monarchism to be anti-British at all. I find it rather churlish in some guises, though, although there are mature and reasoned republicans out there.

    Methinks OP could provide examples?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Your friend sounds like an idiot. Does she also say "if you hate Justin Bieber, you hate music" or "If you hate Bin Laden, you hate guys with beards"?!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Square)
    Who they are means nothing, it's what they do that makes people respect them.
    I think it means a significant amount since it's their arbitrary birth right which has determined their life, status and excessive priviledge - a farce with regards to any notion of fairness/equal opportunity. And yes, i'm sure some people respect them for their actions, however i'm sure most would vest respect in them nigh on irrespective of actions by mere status alone.

    (Original post by Square)
    The queen did not ask for her job, yet she has taken the job in her stride, the same job that she saw drive her father to an early grave.
    It's hardly the most onerous of roles, if anyone seriously tries to attempt to pose her life as one of difficultly and not abject priviledge i feel their relation to the world is rather sheltered. She has an incredible easy existence thanking to her blood.

    (Original post by Square)
    If we did not have the queen we would have some elected politican or someone else in place, who would not be able to carry out her job with such professionalism and unquestioning duty, and who would probably end up being hated on by a lot more people than the queen.
    Such a baseless value-judgement. Thanking to democratic structure that they would be more 'hated' is questionable.

    (Original post by Square)
    Either way, good luck trying to get rid of her, she commands the loyalty of the army, airforce and the navy. and i reckon about 20 loyal guardsmen could probably put a fairly swift end to an uprising from thousands of guardian hippies (who by the way represent the minority of the country who want the monarchy abolished).
    What a load of, for want of better wording, rubbish.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wilson_smith)
    It's hardly the most onerous of roles, if anyone seriously tries to attempt to pose her life as one of difficultly and not abject priviledge i feel their relation to the world is rather sheltered. She has an incredible easy existence thanking to her blood.

    Such a baseless value-judgement. Thanking to democratic structure that they would be more 'hated' is questionable.
    Don't you think you're being just as bad, in making such baseless value-judgements? Do you have any evidence either way for the oppressiveness of the workload of a ceremonial Head of State?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I find it difficult to understand why Britian still has a royal family....there is no difference between them and the likes of cheryl cole/jordan or all these footballers.
    The monarchy still existing doesnt make sense; especially now that Britian is a multi-cultural country, they dont represent Britian anymore.
    I honestly cant see anyone being crowned after this queen.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ~Amy-Eliza~)
    And what's wrong with a History of Art degree...? :colonhash:
    But seriously, I will definitely watch the Royal Wedding. Mainly because it's a moment in our history. My mum is supplying drinks and nibbles
    well at least now when someone asks "what can you do with a history of art degree" you can now say "princess...." :cool:
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I respect and believe in the monarchy and believe they are a great asset to britain. However, i do not believe that disliking them is anti british.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    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.
    I find utterly repugnant the amount of money they get from the taxpayer in exchange for so little. Especially seeing how unintelligent (to say the least) the Queen and her family are. I guess that if they were normal people, the kind of people that have to work to live, they'd be living off benefits... oh wait
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Don't you think you're being just as bad, in making such baseless value-judgements? Do you have any evidence either way for the oppressiveness of the workload of a ceremonial Head of State?
    It appeals to the most elementary of common sense when observed comparative to most people. It's hardly inconspicuous. Her reaction to the onerousness of such is ofcourse subjected to relative/subjective factors, but i think nevertheless one can say with some substance that the conditions of her life are far 'better' by conventional standards than the vast, vast majority.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 26, 2011
The home of Results and Clearing

1,169

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

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.