Forum Replies Created
-
Gurny’s post does come across as dismissive of others, as if those like him who disagree with the monarchy are too intellectually superior than those who support it. NI is broadly right, I feel, in suggesting that the public are generally ambivalent towards the monarchy as an institution. However, this doesn’t mean they would rather have a republic. I suspect many of the ambivalent would say a monarchy is needed for cultural reasons and having a non-political figurehead is ideal over a President Boris.
I do find JI’s post to be reductive and uncharacteristically uncharitable, especially on policing. I don’t think anyone has called for a destruction of the police force in relation to coronation controversies. However, the actions undertaken by The Met are very questionable indeed. People may not agree with protestors’ arguments, but they have a right to air protest in a country with free speech. The police have taken the line of it disturbing or hindering others as pretext, but that’s a line which no protest could reasonably meet. If they are consistent with this, all protest would have grounds for being shut down with arrests. It’s nothing more than authoritarianism, enabled by our hardline home secretaries. It’s disgraceful.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Perhaps people thinking looking up to others ( not parents that’s different, I mean more class wise ) is a good thing, bit like doffing the cap and calling people of so called ” higher breeding ” sir? Doesn’t wash with me, we are all born the same but privilege and class determining your future has never seemed the slightest bit fair or correct , just my opinion. As for them being morally superior or leading by example, well that’s been shown up to be false so many times and if we are all classed as being vulnerable to human frailties then we should all start on a level playing field. Bit like kids who grow up to be natural leaders be it sporting or industry based the talented will rise to the top if given an equal opportunity but then our social system isn’t fair is it, because of privilege.
Possibly, for some, but I don’t think all in favour of a monarchy over a republic do it because they want to doff their cap to superiors. They see the Royals as the UK’s representatives and a relic of our history which we might see cultural loss if they were to go.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Do you ever stop moaning about ‘moaning’? Sorry, but it’s true.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I think many see them as part of the fabric of the UK. Most are aware of their privileged status, but see it as mostly benign because they don’t hold power over laws, don’t think a republic would be any better for classism and like having a head of state who isn’t political. They can represent the country as politically neutral figureheads, which we likely wouldn’t have with an elected presidency.
This is not to say I like the royalty or am a royalist; I am not. However, there are many reasons people do support them which has nothing to do with being gullible, thick and seeing them as superior beings.
2 users thanked author for this post.
That’ll win them over. :-)
2 users thanked author for this post.
Safe and secure elections every time. Bus pass to show you’re a pensioner, season ticket card to get entry, ID for banking. No problem.
7 counts of alleged voter fraud sounds like a secure voting system to me. Now we have many more turned away. It’s not very pro-democracy to be supporting this. Those upset at the risk of 7 counts of dodgy votes in a democracy seem rather ambivalent of hundreds, potentially 2,000,000 (if all potentially eligible voters with no ID turned up), more not counting because of such rubbish.
Oh, and a young person’s railcards aren’t allowed, while a senior’s is, which shows how principled (not) this really is.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Non-football
1 user thanked author for this post.
Bill loves to bait our JI, even though the latter has given his opinion on the topic. I doubt much new can be said and I doubt it will lead to changed opinions on either side.
1 user thanked author for this post.
1 user thanked author for this post.
No, this is today. I am not surprised about this; The Guardian has form for anti-Semitism or apologia for such.
1 user thanked author for this post.
The good work? Knowingly lying on air, as shown in leaked emails and texts, and shilling for Russia? Russia Today reportedly interested in him. Surprise, surprise.
1 user thanked author for this post.
