The Monarchy (now mostly about money)

54?

:grimacing:

5 Likes

If youā€™re over 80 with no obvious cause of death and no suspicious circumstances it goes down as ā€œold ageā€

Nope, cant be bothered.

1 Like

I reckon it was a pillow job because she knew what Truss & co were about to do.
She simply knew too much!

1 Like

Died due to a lack of breath.

1 Like

Iā€™m not sure whether we need a new K3C / coronation thread, but Iā€™m going to pump some air back into this one for the moment.

Iā€™m not much of a royalist or a republican. I donā€™t really care.

However this ā€œyou should swear allegiance to meā€ strikes me as a bit of a tone-deaf liberty.

I want it. You must do it. I get your sworn allegiance. You get nothing in return. Just because.

See also: the prince of Wales. If I was Welsh Iā€™d be pretty annoyed. ā€œBy the way, Iā€™ve decided that my son is the prince of your country. You donā€™t get a sayā€.

5 Likes

I think he sees it as more of an opportunity for the public to join in. Itā€™ll keep the flag wavers happy.

I see it as an opportunity to not join in and hence have zero fucking allegiance. It must work both ways, surely :slight_smile:

3 Likes

Yes. Tone deaf. I am not a fucking ā€˜subjectā€™ either. The whole fucking thing van get in the fucking bin. Ā£250,000,000 could pay for a lot of Food Banksā€¦

5 Likes

Itā€™s healthiest to view royalty as a mix of three things:

  1. Tourist Attraction - one that we maintain with public funds in much the same way as we do with Tower Bridge and Westminster Palace: if we let all of that shit fall down, the tourists all go away and one of our few sources of external income is lost.

  2. Freak Show / Human Zoo - point, laugh, lift-up a stone and peer beneath, bitch and complain, but do also stop and think: would you really want that lifestyle? Perpetually surveilled, scrutinised obsessively, always answerable but devoid of power, robbed of the freedom of anonymity - I wouldnā€™t last a fucking weekā€¦

  3. Caretakers - all those big drafty castles, palaces, stately-piles: weā€™d be paying to keep them up to scratch anyway, might as well fill them with strange-looking inbred hypertoffs for the sake of the above-mentioned rolling reality-show.

Iā€™m not a royalist, but what would we really gain taking the politics-of-envy bait and binning them off? They donā€™t cost us much more than one crooked government contract to line the pockets of some cretin MPā€™s mateā€™s pockets? Not like the govt is going to redirect those funds to the poor and needy is it? Theyā€™ve got PLENTY of cash for that already, but they choose not to, and WE all let them. Thatā€™s where this cuntryā€™s real problems lie, not with some chumbling jug-eared cunt in a stoat-coat and comedy metal hatā€¦

14 Likes

When the queen died ā€˜now was not the timeā€™ to have a public debate about whether we should continue with a monarchy. As it happens I suspect a majority would still prefer one, but maybe Charlesā€™ reign (which might only be 10-15 years) would be the time to have that discussion without fear of offending those who cling to the existing arrangement.

Anyone pledging allegiance?

With tears of pride.

1 Like

Thanks for all that typing Maureen.
My opinion is pretty much the same.
Who would we have had as president? Jeffery Archer, Farage, JRM ā€¦ None of those - probably a Russian Oligarch.
Whoopee.

2 Likes

Thatā€™s the killer for me. The royals may be flawed, but most of the alternative systems seem worse. I can imagine a genuinely good person in the role of President, but I donā€™t honestly think that if we voted for one weā€™d end up with anyone better than the clowns we elect now.

1 Like

ā€œBread & circusesā€¦ā€

My 90YO aunt flew-in from Australia a few days back, sheā€™ll stay for whole thing and, like the proper mad bastard that she is, sheā€™ll sleep in a sleeping bag on the pavement with all the other mad bastards for some of it. Sheā€™s a true outback ocker whoā€™s lived all her life in a one room shack on a sheep station, washing socks and cooking for shearers and the like, so itā€™s luxury compared to what sheā€™s used toā€¦ Sheā€™s only here for the royals - doesnā€™t bother contacting family, her son lets my uncle know sheā€™s coming and we all do what we can to keep an eye out and make sure she gets fed and such-like since she spends every $ on the flights over. Donā€™t feel sorry for her, she loves it all and is tougher than the 10 toughest of us put-togetherā€¦

4 Likes

Since Liz shuffled off the Guardian have run a campaign of articles about the wealth, hidden or otherwise of the Windsors and how they have influenced policy to either grow it and/or avoid tax etc. Of course questions were always going to happen as soon as Chaz ascended to the throne owing to the fact heā€™s a deeply unlikeable arrogant half witted fuck pig, utterly entitled and lazy, and lacking the sense of duty that his mother sustained over decades that he wonā€™t have to endure.

Iā€™m largely stuck with the idea of keeping them because I canā€™t stomach the alternatives which appear to offer little benefit for all the upheaval. However I really donā€™t think that they should be allowed to accumulate vast wealth and at the same time expect to have everything paid for from the public purse.

All the palaces etc should be in public ownership and they can well afford to pay for their own self serving ceremonies imo.

2 Likes

If the role is purely ceremonial (as it should be) it ought not really matter if we have to put up with a Jeffrey Archer, David Attenborough or Floella Benjamin for 3-4 years because rightly, they wouldnā€™t have to do anything besides host visiting dignitaries or cut ribbons on new leisure centres.

1 Like

image

1 Like

Disestablish them, Let then as a freak show and let them look after castles etc.

Also, get rid of the official Church bollocks.

An elected head of state with actual constititional powers, limited admittedly, would be a bloody start.

As Head of state with zero power coupled with our unelected prime minister, well thatā€™s a version of democracy that has had its day IMHO. Electing the HoL to prevent prime ministers exercising soft power via patronage would be a start.

And yes it can be done, you could even allow for a percentage of unelected independent experts.

1 Like

It is all the forelock tugging that gets my goat.
If you have ever worked for an organisation with a royal patron or a company with a royal charter you will probably have seen normal people turn into obseqious sycophantic fawning cunts at the very mention of royalty, all with an eye on getting a gong of course.
You then get the richest people in the land being given the very best stuff we can make or create for free as if they couldnā€™t afford it.
The whole system of patronage and servility is sickening

FUCK THEM ALL

11 Likes