Anybody else sick of the TV coverage of the royal wedding already?

[grimree]

You’ve indirectly proven my point; neither they or any of their relatives are head of state now, are they?

If people are not happy with the United Kingdom’s head of state, other than the French way, how do they get rid?

In both cases, neither was removed by the electorate (people) but by an unelected group of political apparatchnics,so I think my point is valid - I'll go with the constitutional monarchy thanks

 

[Deleted member 37751]

In both cases, neither was removed by the electorate (people) but by an unelected group of political apparatchnics,so I think my point is valid - I'll go with the constitutional monarchy thanks

Both were effectively removed by their party and neither they, or their relatives, are in power now.

Stick to your subservience, obviously makes you feel safe.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

That doesn't make them subservient.

Of course it does; anyone that waves a flag at people who are not elected to office, people who cannot be removed by democratic means are subservient. Because they’re happy to do so doesn’t change the reality.

If people are happy to bow down, then good luck to them... most on here will at least be in their forties and just happy to coast through their lives saying yes sir no sir, so I’m more than prepared for the incoming!

 

[Delayed Steve]

The Royal family bring more money to the economy than they take out. Imagine how much was spent yesterday by tourists alone, how much did the world media pay to broadcast it ? Small companies making plates mugs tea towels and even paper masks, how much did they make from the wedding ?
Imagine been born in a family where your whole life is decided for you. Harry had a small say over his wedding, William didn't right down to the guest list.
I think the Royal family have earned their right to have a few luxuries.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

The Royal family bring more money to the economy than they take out.

No they don’t, Daily Mail types quote ALL tourism when quoting the cost of the monarchy.

Small companies making plates mugs tea towels and even paper masks, how much did they make from the wedding ?

Lol, those plates and tea towels made in China? Then sold at a massive short term, two or three day profit?

Imagine been born in a family where your whole life is decided for you. Harry had a small say over his wedding, William didn't right down to the guest list.

They can abdicate, it really isn’t that hard.

I think the Royal family have earned their right to have a few luxuries.

Yes, all that meeting people and shaking hands must be really tiresome.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

Couldn't agree more. Imagine Maggie, Blair or possibly Corbyn as Head of State !
Lot to be said for "better the devil you know"

Again, this proves my point; none of those people were directly elected by the people, they became prime ministers by default i.e. their parties made them leaders.

An elected head of state for the U.K. would really open the floodgates for democracy in this country, as unlikely as it may be...

 

[DSM10000]

A few points and observations by myself

1. I’m a normal working man struggling to make a living so watching the rich and privileged does get my goat little

Again, this proves my point; none of those people were directly elected by the people, they became prime ministers by default i.e. their parties made them leaders.

An elected head of state for the U.K. would really open the floodgates for democracy in this country, as unlikely as it may be...

But what powers would / should they have?

I do not think that you are advocating a system whereby all power is invested in one person? Parliament would, presumably, still have overall say in creation and implementation of policy?

 

[Deleted member 37751]

But what powers would / should they have?

I do not think that you are advocating a system whereby all power is invested in one person? Parliament would, presumably, still have overall say in creation and implementation of policy?

Even though they have elected a divisive president, the United States would be the base I’d use i.e. no-one in power who can’t be booted out by the ballot box.

 

[DSM10000]

Even though they have elected a divisive president, the United States would be the base I’d use i.e. no-one in power who can’t be booted out by the ballot box.

But still having to get legislation passed by another elected chamber?

 

[grober]

Problem with a head of state with complete executive powers [ even if legitimately elected initially] is that once established quite often first thing they do is change the rules with regard to their re-election/ period of office. This is done by getting rid of / silencing any legitimate opposition/objection by the security apparatus of the state and replacing any independent judiciary with politically compliant members.

 

[Dryce]

Of course it does; anyone that waves a flag at people who are not elected to office, people who cannot be removed by democratic means are subservient.

Nope - it just means that they are choosing waving a flag at the traditional symbol of the nation state.

It's perhaps a good way of reminding politicians *and their ardent supporters* that the numbers they can bring out aren't quite what the nation as a whole can bring out to wave support - and that the nation and its people stand higher than than its politicians.

It's just more than a little ironic that it's a monarchy that manages this in a modern country.

 

[Dryce]

Even though they have elected a divisive president, the United States would be the base I’d use i.e. no-one in power who can’t be booted out by the ballot box.

In principle you shouldn't be able to disagree with this.

And yet the didactic nature of the government of the LotF and some of its agencies is something that the UK people wouldn't necessarily recognise as being any better than our own institutions.

I think if we didn't have the monarchy then I'd avoid having a separate elected HoS and basically converge the PM and HoS into one - and avoid having a separate presidential office or having anybody elected to it.

Personally I find the House of lords rather more democratically troubling than the monarchy. So if I was going to reform anything then that's what I'd look at first.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

The monarchy is part of the fabric of society, of what makes us what we are as a nation, and I think that in general, we're a decent sort of nation. Tinker with the system, and Britain would change, in ways which might not be predictable. (Bit like Brexit, but let's not open that can of worms again...)

Well, if nothing else, my input has got you from starting a thread whinging about the royal family to extolling their virtues.

You’re welcome.

 

[Peter103]

E55BOF, Well said Sir,, I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[LTD]

For all the naysayers about the Royal Family.

What country has a better system in place for you ?

USA, Russia, North Korea ?

The UNITED KINGDOM of GREAT BRITAIN and NORTHERN IRELAND.

Hate it ? I do think that the democracy this brings affords you the option to leave.

I don’t thing the Aristocratic Overlords would mind

 

[E55BOF]

Well, if nothing else, my input has got you from starting a thread whinging about the royal family to extolling their virtues.

You’re welcome.

Not at all; you misunderstand me. The title of the thread tells you what I actually said...

You're most welcome.

 

[Deleted member 11979]

The Queen is great

 

[Scott_F]

The Royal family bring more money to the economy than they take out. Imagine how much was spent yesterday by tourists alone, how much did the world media pay to broadcast it ? Small companies making plates mugs tea towels and even paper masks, how much did they make from the wedding ?
Imagine been born in a family where your whole life is decided for you. Harry had a small say over his wedding, William didn't right down to the guest list.
I think the Royal family have earned their right to have a few luxuries.

Whatever the pros and cons (and there are many of each), the fact that they are a good earner is a pretty poor justification for having a royal family.

"God save the queen,
'Cause tourists are money...."

 

[Scott_F]

Nope - it just means that they are choosing waving a flag at the traditional symbol of the nation state.

It's perhaps a good way of reminding politicians *and their ardent supporters* that the numbers they can bring out aren't quite what the nation as a whole can bring out to wave support - and that the nation and its people stand higher than than its politicians.

It's just more than a little ironic that it's a monarchy that manages this in a modern country.

You ignore the fact that politicians have to engage with the population every day over a wide variety of issues - many of which are complex, contentious, divisive and unpopular.

The royal family on the other hand are (theoretically at least) apolitical and can therefore select the most favourable ground on which to engage. So we see them far less frequently and when we do it's at events such as hospital openings, charity galas, grand state occasions, royal weddings etc.. All of these are carefully planned and choreographed and it would be virtually impossible for them not to look good as a result of their participation.

We also have a media that is still largely deferential and is willing to suppress most of damaging stories (and there are LOT of them !) about family members whilst gleefully ripping politicians to shreds over lesser transgressions and mistakes.

So with the above in mind, the fact that many people still hold the royals in such high regard isn't ironic at all.

 

[renault12ts]

The irony of all this is that on this forum, populated as it is by members in the vast majority from GB, you can have this debate in a reasonable and civilised manner. Yet, in NI, that part which when added to GB makes up the UK you definitely can't.

Those for and against the Royal family are very much drawn along DUP/SF lines. No matter what you say aloud (which would be foolish in a public place) you will be labelled as one or 'tother, that's to say a unionist or a nationalist (and their respective extremes).

This is not to say that pro/anti Royal family is absolutely defined as such...but just that in this corner of the UK there is less freedom to express one's self than in the rest. So, enjoy your freedom because it doesn't extend quite as far as you'd think.