Jump to content

Republicanism


Clem Fandango

Recommended Posts

Clem Fandango

For those of you living in Commonwealth Realms, I'm just wondering what your thoughts are on the monarchy? And if you're in favour of turning your nation into a republic, what would that mean for the Commonwealth as a whole?

 

I think, that for Australia, the monarch provides an important role in binding us to the United Kingdom, even if only symbolically. I think we have very little history as such a young nation and that the UK is (for most of us) our homeland and that severing our links with doesn't seem terribly appealing. On the other hand, I feel it does clash with Australia's values of equality- no one in the royal family can marry a catholic, and Australia is becoming increasing diverse and multicultural, but with the monarch the head of state will always be white (though I disagree with this as I feel we are historically British). Furthermore, Australia was intended to be a "working class paradise" that rejects Britain's rigid caste system, a system that a monarchy embodies.

 

In Britain itself, outside of the arguments of tradition, the monarchy has a practical use in providing an apolitical figurehead for the country, rather than a president who has loyalties to a particular party/ideology or constituent country (the monarch is British where as a president could consider themselves Scottish or English above all else). The apolitical nature of the monarch makes them useful for the ability to dismiss the government (as the Governor-General of Australia did in the seventies) though an appointed president would be the same.

 

So, what does everybody think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

General Goose

Well, I'm a pretty big proponent of major political reform here in the UK, especially when it comes to the House of Lords. But, above it all, I support keeping the monarchy. Maybe liberalising some of the restrictions (the not marrying Catholics rule is pretty outdated and meaningless in today's world), but, as a whole, I feel it serves multiple purposes. It serves as a patriotic rallying point for the British people (as opposed to, say, the flag for Americans), helping us get through times of national hardship (see: World War Z). It also brings over some rather nice tourism funds over to many parts of the United Kingdom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If England became a Republic I would be absolutely disgusted. The monarchy is very important to me, they are the symbol of our national identity, they are a key part of England's identity. However, I am passionately in favour of giving Scotland and Wales independence as they have their own cultural identities and may have different ideas on this subject. I ask you, who is British? I'm English, that's who I am. Scots consider themselves Scots. This whole 'Britain' thing is absurd. If they don't want a Monarchy, they shouldn't have one. That goes for the whole Commonwealth too.

 

Let me put it this way, if England was to lose the Monarchy I would barely consider it England anymore. I would be utterly distraught, I don't like Republicanism, I don't understand Republicanism, I don't want Republicanism.

 

It seems to make things too dull, the world and his wife is a f*cking Republic, President-this and President-that. I wouldn't mind if it was a Republic in all but name, in which 'King' or 'Queen' was an honourary title bestowed on the elected leader. After all, us English once elected our Kings when we were still working in a system of various tribes. The thought of England without a King or Queen is so bizarre it almost seems obscene.

 

Let me put it as bluntly as I can, making this country a Republic would be like bending our nation over a table and raping it with a Bowie knife. That is how I would feel.

Edited by Typhus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minus the Boom

They serve no purpose whatsoever here in the Netherlands, other then cost the taxpayers money. Maybe keep them like a charity funded thing but definitely find another way to fund them than taxpayer money, and if that doesn't work just abolish it as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clem Fandango
I ask you, who is British? I'm English, that's who I am. Scots consider themselves Scots. This whole 'Britain' thing is absurd.

What the f*ck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best thing for the Royalty to do is resign their positions, their wealth only exists after centuries of oppression. Why am I supposed to respect, admire and love a prince or queen? Are they great? No. I can see reason for their existence centuries ago, however now they are irrelevant, costing millions in protection, buildings etc. They're receiving handouts just because of birth right, that's not democratic. Does that mean i can slaughter and oppress for my future generations?

 

Hang the bitch and be done with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ask you, who is British? I'm English, that's who I am. Scots consider themselves Scots. This whole 'Britain' thing is absurd.

What the f*ck?

What didn't you understand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have come to disagree with the idea behind the Monarchy. The belief that someone has the right to Lord over others, simply because of their lineage is disgusting to me. No one has any right to Lord over someone else, regardless of divine right, blood lineage or whatever false premise you decide on.

 

England needs to drop the Monarchy and everything they stand for, stood for and pertain to. The Commonwealth needs to be dissolved. Canada needs to become a Republic, not a member of the Commonwealth. This applies to Tonga, Fiji, New Zealand, Australia, India and every other Commonwealth Country.

 

It cracks me up that these countries all fought for independence from the Crown, yet, still allow the Crown to dictate much of how the countries are run. Up until recently, New Zealand relied on the Crown for retrials. That is until they set up their own Supreme Court.

 

If these nations truly wanted independence, they would declare themselves sovereign nations and abandon the remnants of the British Empire.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clem Fandango
I ask you, who is British? I'm English, that's who I am. Scots consider themselves Scots. This whole 'Britain' thing is absurd.

What the f*ck?

What didn't you understand?

Well, you said Scots aren't British, for one. I'm 100% Scottish and my family are British to their bootstraps. The United Kingdom is, for all intents and purposes, one nation with one identity, made up of smaller countries that have their own identities as well. You just can't seem to differentiate between what's English and what's British.

 

 

am passionately in favour of giving Scotland and Wales independence as they have their own cultural identities and may have different ideas on this subject

The monarch is as much the Queen of Scotland as she is of England, given that it's all one kingdom. She's not the Queen of England, as Americans like to refer to her as, she's the Queen of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. And what do you mean "giving" them independence like they're all out campaigning for it and feel absolutely no connection to Britain's cultural identity at all - they're massive contributions to which I feel you are marginalising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ask you, who is British? I'm English, that's who I am. Scots consider themselves Scots. This whole 'Britain' thing is absurd.

What the f*ck?

What didn't you understand?

Well, you said Scots aren't British, for one. I'm 100% Scottish and my family are British to their bootstraps. The United Kingdom is, for all intents and purposes, one nation with one identity, made up of smaller countries that have their own identities as well. You just can't seem to differentiate between what's English and what's British.

 

 

am passionately in favour of giving Scotland and Wales independence as they have their own cultural identities and may have different ideas on this subject

The monarch is as much the Queen of Scotland as she is of England, given that it's all one kingdom. She's not the Queen of England, as Americans like to refer to her as, she's the Queen of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. And what do you mean "giving" them independence like they're all out campaigning for it and feel absolutely no connection to Britain's cultural identity at all - they're massive contributions to which I feel you are marginalising.

I think Renton summed up the Scottish viewpoint of the British best in Trainspotting:

 

 

It's sh*tE being Scottish! We're the lowest of the low, the scum of the f*cking earth, the most wretched, miserable, servile, pathetic trash that was ever shat into civilization. Some people hate the English, I don't. They're just wankers. We, on the other hand, are colonized by wankers. We can't even find a decent culture to be colonized by. We are ruled by effete arseholes. It's a sh*te state of affairs to be in, Tommy! And all the fresh air in the world won't make any f*cking difference!

 

Anyway, DOWN WITH THE MONARCHY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm not British and I've never been under a monarchy but I just have a question. Why would anyone pay millions in taxpayer money to a herediatary despot, willingly? I under the whole culture thing, but there are aspects of culture that should be regretted right? Why support a system with enthusiasm that honors and pays for a select few to loot your wealth for life simply based off of some crap like, "birth right". And as far as Canada and other commonwealth nations go, grow some balls. YOUR A NATION, whatever happened to creating your own path into the future, with your own new exciting culture? If your going to declare independence, do it all the way. Who cares if you and Britan have a common past, that was then this is now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clem Fandango
I think Renton summed up the Scottish viewpoint of the British best in Trainspotting:

 

 

It's sh*tE being Scottish! We're the lowest of the low, the scum of the f*cking earth, the most wretched, miserable, servile, pathetic trash that was ever shat into civilization. Some people hate the English, I don't. They're just wankers. We, on the other hand, are colonized by wankers. We can't even find a decent culture to be colonized by. We are ruled by effete arseholes. It's a sh*te state of affairs to be in, Tommy! And all the fresh air in the world won't make any f*cking difference!

I realise it isn't meant to be taken literally, and you're probably joking by posting it, but Scotland wasn't "colonised" by England, their parliaments both decided to merge into one state for their own reasons. The Scottish, so they could gain access to England's colonies in North America and lift themselves out of financial crisis, and the English so they could strengthen their country and have any hope of competing with France on the world stage. And Scotland isn't "ruled" by England - it just has the capital. The people who happen to live in the capital city don't rule the country, that's extremely childish logic. Further, England gave up it's independence as much as Scotland did. The very idea that the English "took over" Scotland is insulting, and relegates Scotland's whopping contribution to Britain's political, artistic and industrial hegemony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The monarch is as much the Queen of Scotland as she is of England, given that it's all one kingdom. She's not the Queen of England, as Americans like to refer to her as, she's the Queen of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. And what do you mean "giving" them independence like they're all out campaigning for it and feel absolutely no connection to Britain's cultural identity at all - they're massive contributions to which I feel you are marginalising.

But I don't want their contributions. I want this whole place to be four seperate countries again. England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales. This concept of 'Britain' is stupid, what does it mean? The Scots are Scots, the Irish are Irish, the Welsh are Welsh. And calling us 'British' is an insult to our respective national identities.

I just want things to be more unique. The other nations of the British Isles have their own identities and they shouldn't have to settle for this hodgepodge notion of a united island. I'm personally sick of it, I'm sick of the whole 'British' thing. If the other nations don't like the Monarchy, why should they be lumped with it? Why should they pay for it? Just to continue the illusion of unity?

 

No, we should all be seperate and once again enjoy our own unique character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minus the Boom

 

Yeah I'm not British and I've never been under a monarchy but I just have a question. Why would anyone pay millions in taxpayer money to a herediatary despot, willingly? I under the whole culture thing, but there are aspects of culture that should be regretted right? Why support a system with enthusiasm that honors and pays for a select few to loot your wealth for life simply based off of some crap like, "birth right". And as far as Canada and other commonwealth nations go, grow some balls. YOUR A NATION, whatever happened to creating your own path into the future, with your own new exciting culture? If your going to declare independence, do it all the way. Who cares if you and Britan have a common past, that was then this is now!

I don't willingly pay for them. I think it's bullsh*t, the fact that you're born into ruling, but even more so that they don't rule and are just a pretty face for the five people who care about that. It's shallow really. I don't think there are any respectable politicians who've openly stated they want to abolish the monarchy but it's bound to happen within thirty years if you ask me. Their spending budget is already shrinking.

 

And I like that Trainspotting quote...

 

Disclaimer: I know that they're not just a pretty face. Still, I think that even what they do now isn't something you should be born into - spending a lot of money and doing some diplomatic chores here and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as the royal family don't use their royal perogative to effect politics, I couldn't care less. They cost about 65p per citizen per year as a whole, so the financial argument is bollocks too- and that comes entirely from Britain, not from the wider commonwealth. In fact, re-drafting the written sections of our constitution to exclude the royal perogative and to disband the monarchy would probably be more expensive that just letting them be.

Untitled-1.jpg
AMD Ryzen 5900X (4.7GHz All-Core PBO2) | Gigabye X570S Pro | 32GB G-Skill Trident Z RGB 3600MHz CL16

EK-Quantum Reflection D5 | XSPC D5 PWM | TechN CPU Blocks | HardwareLabs GTS & GTX 360 Radiators
Corsair AX750 | Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic XL | ASUS RTX 4080 TUF @2970MHz | Sabrant Rocket Plus 1TB
Sabrant Rocket 2TB | Samsung 970 Evo 1TB | 2x ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q | Q Acoustics 2010i | Sabaj A4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clem Fandango
But I don't want their contributions.

Well you already have their contributions, and a lot of what makes you proud to be English would not exist if not for the union. England would never have become a super power on it's own, Britain wouldn't have been the first commercialised and industrialised nation (see:tobacco lords, James Watt inventing steam power), people the world over would not be speaking English, Britain would never have been the industrial power house that it was without Scotland (Scotland has been called the "work shop of the empire"), and the absence of the Scottish Enlightenment would render Britain's academic landscape barren.

 

 

The Scots are Scots, the Irish are Irish, the Welsh are Welsh

You don't realise it, but you're starting to border on the offensive. You're basically telling me that I, as a Scot, have no connection to England's rich culture and achievements, and that England is just my homeland's neighbour.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vinnygorgeous

I want the monarchy abolished, I just don't like it, they could easily afford to pay their own way, and that 65p thing doesn’t factor in the single largest cost of their upkeep, the security bill. Their a bunch of pampered self serving lesions that need to be severed, permanently! The idea that they give us our national identity is insulting to me, there are parts of history we should be proud of but the institution of monarchy is not one of them.

 

Btw I consider myself British first and foremost and English second, it bugs me no end that the St Georges Cross has replaced the Union Jack amongst English patriots. Watch the 1966 world cup final, watch our military forces, it's the f*ckin' Union Jack you should be proud of not the symbol for the crusades.

 

The only good thing the monarchy resulted in was the song Royal Britannia but why not redo it as Socialist Britannia, or Republican Britannia neither quite fits if you try singing them but its hardly a reason to keep the basteros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

and that 65p thing doesn’t factor in the single largest cost of their upkeep, the security bill.

£46m a year, yes, but that still equates to an additional 70p or so a person- and the "royal security" thing is a bit of a misnomer, as it's costs also include the maintainance and upkeep of security systems and personnel on crown owned land (which is a very large area). Which as far as I know is the vast majority of the bill.

Untitled-1.jpg
AMD Ryzen 5900X (4.7GHz All-Core PBO2) | Gigabye X570S Pro | 32GB G-Skill Trident Z RGB 3600MHz CL16

EK-Quantum Reflection D5 | XSPC D5 PWM | TechN CPU Blocks | HardwareLabs GTS & GTX 360 Radiators
Corsair AX750 | Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic XL | ASUS RTX 4080 TUF @2970MHz | Sabrant Rocket Plus 1TB
Sabrant Rocket 2TB | Samsung 970 Evo 1TB | 2x ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q | Q Acoustics 2010i | Sabaj A4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vinnygorgeous
and that 65p thing doesn’t factor in the single largest cost of their upkeep, the security bill.

£46m a year, yes, but that still equates to an additional 70p or so a person- and the "royal security" thing is a bit of a misnomer, as it's costs also include the maintainance and upkeep of security systems and personnel on crown owned land. Which as far as I know is the vast majority of the bill.

There are only estimates over the true cost of their security bill. They have been put under pressure to be more transparent recently and as a result are trying desperately hard to appear to be value for money but before the transparency was the ridiculous excess at the taxpayers expense..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't want their contributions.

Well you already have their contributions, and a lot of what makes you proud to be English would not exist if not for the union. England would never have become a super power on it's own, Britain wouldn't have been the first commercialised and industrialised nation (see:tobacco lords, James Watt inventing steam power), people the world over would not be speaking English, Britain would never have been the industrial power house that it was without Scotland (Scotland has been called the "work shop of the empire"), and the absence of the Scottish Enlightenment would render Britain's academic landscape barren.

 

 

The Scots are Scots, the Irish are Irish, the Welsh are Welsh

You don't realise it, but you're starting to border on the offensive. You're basically telling me that I, as a Scot, have no connection to England's rich culture and achievements, and that England is just my homeland's neighbour.

Please don't mistake my stance for any kind of isolationism. It's not.

Let me put it like this, I would rather have a friendly neighbour than a bitter brother. We are tied together, tied together way too closely. I think more devolution is needed. I want peaceful, willing and happy co-operation between nations in the British Isles. Not forced intimacy, which is how I view the whole concept of 'Great Britain'.

 

You're right, the Scots have made a lot of grand contributions. I mean, wasn't Darwin Scottish? And look what he did. But I'd rather have an informal alliance based on mutual trust rather than this big monstrosity that pleases no one.

 

Honestly, I am stunned that so many people seem happy with the idea of 'Great Britain'. I really don't understand how that can be, but I want you to know that I mean no offence, I can be rather bombastic from time to time, but I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minus the Boom

Yeah but imagine if all that money would go to say, the education system. It's not much to pay for the indivual but the collective cost of the monarchy would make a difference in pretty much every other public sector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but imagine if all that money would go to say, the education system. It's not much to pay for the indivual but the collective cost of the monarchy would make a difference in pretty much every other public sector.

But what would you replace the Monarchy with? It would turn the country into a boring, souless Republic. Identical to every other country, and that's what scares me about the idea - that it's promoted by people who hate this land, who have no national pride and no concept that some people quite like being English.

 

By all means, tell me I'm wrong. I would love to hear from some Republicans who actually give a damn about England and aren't just hopping on the Communist bandwaggon favoured by most of our pot-addled, sex-addicted, binge-drinking student rioters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vinnygorgeous

 

Yeah but imagine if all that money would go to say, the education system. It's not much to pay for the indivual but the collective cost of the monarchy would make a difference in pretty much every other public sector.

But what would you replace the Monarchy with? It would turn the country into a boring, souless Republic. Identical to every other country, and that's what scares me about the idea - that it's promoted by people who hate this land, who have no national pride and no concept that some people quite like being English.

 

By all means, tell me I'm wrong. I would love to hear from some Republicans who actually give a damn about England and aren't just hopping on the Communist bandwaggon favoured by most of our pot-addled, sex-addicted, binge-drinking student rioters.

I care deeply for my country if I didn't I wouldn't give a f*ck about having a monarchy. I just don't see what is soulless about modern republics in the first place but regardless we wouldn't be like other countries because national identity doesn't come from politicians or royal families we would still be British and we would still have a quasi democracy we just wouldn't have a figurehead head of state that to many of us is an insult.

 

You tell me what is so good about the institution of monarchy, what makes them better than us that we should revere them because all I can see is birthright, which frankly is no reason at all.

 

And even if you just go on the conservative estimates of what they cost every man, woman, girl and boy its still too much for a small group of individuals who sit on top of an institution steeped in a tradition of oppression, injustice and violence. They should have been done away with hundreds of years ago simply because they are now mostly benign doesn’t mean we should keep them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

General Goose

I agree with devolution, so that each of the individual nations of Britain gets to dictate their own policy on certain domestic issues, but as a whole I oppose breaking our country apart. It would be damaging in terms of culture, geopolitics, economy and military strength, and ultimately place all the countries that currently make up the UK at a disadvantage.

 

On the topic of hand, I oppose republicanism. The claim she's a hereditary despot doesn't really hold much water in modern Britain, since at best she's just a political advisor who holds very little real political power. And from an economic perspective the monarchy is good. It creates jobs both directly and indirectly and attracts lots of tourists to the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but imagine if all that money would go to say, the education system. It's not much to pay for the indivual but the collective cost of the monarchy would make a difference in pretty much every other public sector.

The collective cost of the upkeep for the royal family and the security of their land is about £75m per anum. Sounds like a lot but is a drop in the ocean in reality. Anyway, the problem with making financially based comparisons is that they ignore the primary and most pressing issue with most public sector organisations- the fact that they are poorly run and therefore financially inefficient. I guarentee that the heath service wastes about £75m a week. Hell, last month them MoD cut up £3bn worth of completed ASW aircraft and no-one batted an eyelid. But £75m worth of Royal family expenditure and people get offended? Says a lot about the average person in this country.

Untitled-1.jpg
AMD Ryzen 5900X (4.7GHz All-Core PBO2) | Gigabye X570S Pro | 32GB G-Skill Trident Z RGB 3600MHz CL16

EK-Quantum Reflection D5 | XSPC D5 PWM | TechN CPU Blocks | HardwareLabs GTS & GTX 360 Radiators
Corsair AX750 | Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic XL | ASUS RTX 4080 TUF @2970MHz | Sabrant Rocket Plus 1TB
Sabrant Rocket 2TB | Samsung 970 Evo 1TB | 2x ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q | Q Acoustics 2010i | Sabaj A4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I care deeply for my country if I didn't I wouldn't give a f*ck about having a monarchy. I just don't see what is soulless about modern republics in the first place but regardless we wouldn't be like other countries because national identity doesn't come from politicians or royal families we would still be British and we would still have a quasi democracy we just wouldn't have a figurehead head of state that to many of us is an insult.

 

You tell me what is so good about the institution of monarchy, what makes them better than us that we should revere them because all I can see is birthright, which frankly is no reason at all.

 

And even if you just go on the conservative estimates of what they cost every man, woman, girl and boy its still too much for a small group of individuals who sit on top of an institution steeped in a tradition of oppression, injustice and violence. They should have been done away with hundreds of years ago simply because they are now mostly benign doesn’t mean we should keep them.

First of all, thank you for a great response, I wish more people thought like you smile.gif

 

But on subject, I have to say that I find a great deal to be proud of in our Monarchy. Our Monarch's have lasted since the time of Alfred The Great. Whilst the Tsar's and the Kaiser's were either sent into ignominious exile or simply massacred, the English crown remains. And the reason is that our Kings and Queens have adapted. They have changed with each blowing of the wind.

 

To reach this stage, to reach the point where the Crown and the people co-operate peacefully, has cost us dearly. Civil war, revolution and yes, as you pointed out, a great deal of injustice and violence. But that same injustice and violence has shaped our national psyche, it has given us a backbone and a heritage and I truly believe with all my heart that the Queen is a big part of that.

 

She is now just a figurehead but is a key figure in representing us, in embodying England and our resolve, grandiosity and sense of tradition.

As I said, if the Prime Minister was to adopt the honourary title of 'King' or 'Queen', that would be fine by me. But I don't want a President of England. I always want there to be a King or a Queen, so we can always say that no matter what, the crown remains - as a symbol of all that bloodshed and suffering that has created what you see today.

 

The bloodline is not as important as the title itself and the meaning of that title. The English should always have a King or Queen, and if that King or Queen is elected, so much the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minus the Boom
Yeah but imagine if all that money would go to say, the education system. It's not much to pay for the indivual but the collective cost of the monarchy would make a difference in pretty much every other public sector.

But what would you replace the Monarchy with? It would turn the country into a boring, souless Republic. Identical to every other country, and that's what scares me about the idea - that it's promoted by people who hate this land, who have no national pride and no concept that some people quite like being English.

 

By all means, tell me I'm wrong. I would love to hear from some Republicans who actually give a damn about England and aren't just hopping on the Communist bandwaggon favoured by most of our pot-addled, sex-addicted, binge-drinking student rioters.

dontgetit.gif I'd replace it with a republic. How is disagreeing with birthright hating your country? And what's communist about a republic? And no, I don't give a damn about England. I care what happens to my country though, the Netherlands.

 

 

The collective cost of the upkeep for the royal family and the security of their land is about £75m per anum. Sounds like a lot but is a drop in the ocean in reality. Anyway, the problem with making financially based comparisons is that they ignore the primary and most pressing issue with most public sector organisations- the fact that they are poorly run and therefore financially inefficient. I guarentee that the heath service wastes about £75m a week. Hell, last month them MoD cut up £3bn worth of completed ASW aircraft and no-one batted an eyelid. But £75m worth of Royal family expenditure and people get offended? Says a lot about the average person in this country.

Please stop assuming I live in your country...

 

Both situations are a waste and it shouldn't happen, but this is a thread about republics and monarchies, not the public sector and its cost in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clem Fandango
The claim she's a hereditary despot doesn't really hold much water in modern Britain, since at best she's just a political advisor who holds very little real political power.

I think it's more an aesthetic/ethical issue with the common Brit (Australian, Canadian, whatever) having to address someone as "your majesty" when they've really done nothing to deserve any kind of accolade and status.

 

 

But what would you replace the Monarchy with? It would turn the country into a boring, souless Republic. Identical to every other country

Yeah, and it's pretty much like admitting that we've been wrong all this time while the French and the Americans had it right. And I'd rather stay servile to a bloodline of German aristocrats than live in a world where Britain concedes anything to the French.

 

 

I don't give a damn about England. I care what happens to my country though, the Netherlands.

...

Please stop assuming I live in your country...

 

 

Oh wtf, you're Dutch? Then where do you get off saying you like that quote about the Scottish being servile scum? mad.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Uk should get rid of the monarchy. I just don't see the point any more to be honest. There's nothing there, except for a sh*tload of redundant sh*te that's just plain not necessary (e.g. the Royal Assent, what's up with that?). Holding on to the British Royal family only means we have to spend money on one family, who aren't particularly remarkable themselves, to live in splendour and have everyone fall at their feet. Who gives them that right? God? F*ck off. The last thing the Royals did for me was give me an extra Bank Holiday for their upcoming wedding. What a show!

 

I don't see the Roayls as a patriotic icon, and if there were to be some crazy idealistic war in the future, I wouldn't rally around the monarchy but rather rally behind the country and its people.

 

Scrap the Palace and build a multi story there I say, Central London could always do with more parking. Joking, obviously. Buckingham Palace would make a ballin' museum though.

user posted image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ChanandlerBong

She doesn't really do anything bad, she costs us precisely f*ck all in money terms and also provides an impartial head of state for us. It's not as if she's oppressing people or killing them or doing anything bad, she just swans around and waves a lot. Some of you talk as if she has just come and took a massive sh*te on your carpet and told you to clean it up, commoner. We might as well keep her. The Prime Minister is the President in all but name, he has all the power, no Prime Minister is going to go to the trouble of abolishing a 1000 year old dynasty to please some people who feel like the route of all this country's problems is the fact we have a Queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.