The 'Monarchy Question'? (1 Viewer)

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Yes very good - however I meant that there have been many questions over Mr Robinson's activities down the years, yet he has still been elected - I am saying that in most seats the winner is known in advance, thus Tony Blair's son being lined up for a Coventry seat.

The conservative party wins more votes than Labour, but comes second, the Liberal Democrats would have more seats if PR was introduced, my point is that for the majority of us, we do not have any influence on who is elected ~ so where is trhe democracy ?

So you'd be happy for your vote to be withdrawn I'm assuming?

 

---

[scroobiustom]

Voting is pointless.....

Mainly due the fact that even if you do effect a change of MP.....its just swapping one ex-public school boy with a silver spoon in his mouth for another....they just wear different colour ties....

....Ideology died in the 1980's.....

Now, we have a "choice" of 3 parties of bland over-privileged political class yes-men who have never had a proper job or lived in the real world since the day they were born (into the lap of luxury).

Tories, Labour, Lib Dems.....Same set of lying rich bastards with different colour ties.:jerkit:

...Lucky bastards who get to live in dictatorships aren't they :facepalm:

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

You can t really make people's blood boil though can you? Like you can t force your opinion on others. There are lots of things that make my blood boil that you would probably not have a problem with. Everyone is different, for now at least

You could if you sent them into space Problem is a lot of people are very happy to complain about inequality in so many walks of life but not the biggest one which is written into the constitution-I don't understand it.

 

[Macca]

You could if you sent them into space Problem is a lot of people are very happy to complain about inequality in so many walks of life but not the biggest one which is written into the constitution-I don't understand it.

perhaps because there are other things that we have more chance of changing?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

perhaps because there are other things that we have more chance of changing?

Just because change is difficult to achieve doesn't make it not worth trying.

 

[WillieStanley]

I don't buy all this "There's not much chance of change so I won't bother trying"

If there weren't those willing to fight against all odds we'd still have the slave trade, mainstream racism, women wouldn't be able to vote, kids would still be working til their young death, there'd be no workers rights... I could go on.
All this was achievable when hope was all but lost. What makes the implementation of real democratic rule so different?

 

[Macca]

I d fight to the death for some things. This one is down my list a bit though I accept that the concept of Royalty is outdated. I'm not sure I would fancy hand to hand combat with the legions of middle aged female Royalists. Being beaten to death with bunting isn t the way I want to go

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

I'd fight to the death for family......and I'd fight to serious injury for a couple good mates.....

....but I would'nt even bother to vote on the question of monarchy even if the polling station was in my front room.....

...It matters not a jot to me or my life.....and it doesn't actually really affect anyone elses life.....other than possibly providing or removing a few jobs or the actual principle of it annoying a few students with too much time on their hands....

 

[Disorganised1]

So you'd be happy for your vote to be withdrawn I'm assuming?

Oh no - I'm just saying we don't truly have a democracy - just enough of one to keep the simple minded one reasonably content. Just occaisionally something causes an uprising and people actually use thier heads to vote.

 

[coundonskyblue]

I just think there's much more important issues in the country at the moment. Lots of problems, none of which are caused by the monarchy.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I just think there's much more important issues in the country at the moment. Lots of problems, none of which are caused by the monarchy.

Like what, the faltering economy which the Royals have leeched off for all time?

 

[coundonskyblue]

<p>

Like what, the faltering economy which the Royals have leeched off for all time?

Visit Buckingham palace on any afternoon & see how many tourists are there. Then you will see how bad they are for the economy.

I think I would be a bit more sympathetic to the republican cause if it wasn't always the looney left that keeps banging on about it. It just seems to me to be another chance to destroy a symbol of a country they hate so much.

 

[WillieStanley]

"I didn't write God Save The Queen because I hate the British people, I wrote it because I love em" - John Lydon.

The "Looney Left"? Do you write for the Daily Mail? If it wasn't for left wing politics, this country you love would be even more of a mess than it is now!!! Reward the rich and punish the poor. Left wing ideals are based on the very essence of what make us human. Thr Right wing is based on animalistic dog eat dog harshness, a selfish and blonkered view of the world. The fact that the term "Looney Left" even exists demonstrates how weak the politics are.

 

[WillieStanley]

<p>

Visit Buckingham palace on any afternoon & see how many tourists are there. Then you will see how bad they are for the economy.

I think I would be a bit more sympathetic to the republican cause if it wasn't always the looney left that keeps banging on about it. It just seems to me to be another chance to destroy a symbol of a country they hate so much.

Who's paying for Kate's private hospital?

 

[Disorganised1]

Of course we'd be so much better off with someone like Arthur Scargill in charge. :thinking about:

Or maybe Bob Crowe, couple of fine left wing characters there.

 

[WillieStanley]

Of course we'd be so much better off with someone like Arthur Scargill in charge. :thinking about:

Or maybe Bob Crowe, couple of fine left wing characters there.

Left wing politics arent perfect, granted.

 

[Tad]

Left wing politics arent perfect, granted.

Your better off somewhere in the middle in my opinion.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

<p>

Visit Buckingham palace on any afternoon & see how many tourists are there. Then you will see how bad they are for the economy.

I think I would be a bit more sympathetic to the republican cause if it wasn't always the looney left that keeps banging on about it. It just seems to me to be another chance to destroy a symbol of a country they hate so much.

More nonsense Coundon. Republicans want Britons to do better than having the head of state chosen for them by birth-to insinuate that we must hate the country is an insult.

 

[Grendel]

More nonsense Coundon. Republicans want Britons to do better than having the head of state chosen for them by birth-to insinuate that we must hate the country is an insult.

There is of course no evidence we would do better.

Given your obvious socialist stance (ignoring of course your private education) I would guess you pefer this society to the United States with its complete disregard for public welfare.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

There is of course no evidence we would do better.

Given your obvious socialist stance (ignoring of course your private education) I would guess you pefer this society to the United States with its complete disregard for public welfare.

Republicanism isn't tantamount to socialism. I envy Americans for being able to elect their leader-but I don't envy their healthcare system.

 

[Sick Boy]

100% British God Save the Queen

It's a shame that they aren't, eh?

Get rid of the lot of them.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

<p>

Visit Buckingham palace on any afternoon & see how many tourists are there. Then you will see how bad they are for the economy.

I think I would be a bit more sympathetic to the republican cause if it wasn't always the looney left that keeps banging on about it. It just seems to me to be another chance to destroy a symbol of a country they hate so much.

The question I'm going to ask in retaliation is this: If there was no monarchy, would those same tourists be there?

Before you answer, think about this, people still visit the 'Forbidden Kingdom' in China (Chinese Buckingham) and people still visit the 'Winter Palace' in Russia, do they have monarchs? Furthermore, do those tourists visit Buckingham to see the Royals? No, therefore, your argument is flawed.

'Looney left', you make me laugh, Republicanism has just as much 'Liberal' (e.g. Richard Dawkins) as well as 'Looney Left' influences.

So based on what you said, do you vote BNP, Tory or UKIP of the 'ridiculous right'?

 

[Grendel]

The question I'm going to ask in retaliation is this: If there was no monarchy, would those same tourists be there?

Before you answer, think about this, people still visit the 'Forbidden Kingdom' in China (Chinese Buckingham) and people still visit the 'Winter Palace' in Russia, do they have monarchs? Furthermore, do those tourists visit Buckingham to see the Royals? No, therefore, your argument is flawed.

Yes the same tourists would be there -- that particular argument does not hold water.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Yes the same tourists would be there -- that particular argument does not hold water.

Thanks Grendel, I rest my case on tourism.

 

[Houchens Head]

I been to London a few times - visiting the wife's daughter and also for sight-seeing trips. I've never once bothered with Buckingham Palace. Do you know why? Because there are far too many other sights to see and things to do in London. The foreign visitors do exactly the same. They don't just come for the bloody sponging monarchy. So the argument "They bring in tourism" is a load of bolloocks!

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Fact is Grendel that tourism would suffer more from closing Alton Towers. People don't come to or indeed get to see the Royals-they are drawn by the history which will always be there.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I been to London a few times - visiting the wife's daughter and also for sight-seeing trips. I've never once bothered with Buckingham Palace. Do you know why? Because there are far too many other sights to see and things to do in London. The foreign visitors do exactly the same. They don't just come for the bloody sponging monarchy. So the argument "They bring in tourism" is a load of bolloocks!

Exactly, London is one of the 'super cities' of the world, alongside New York, Tokyo, Paris, Berlin. In fact, saying tourist go to London to see Buckingham palace is IMO, an insult to 'Britons' as those of you (who hold that argument) are degrading London.

 

[Macca]

Tourists go to see a tiny part of London, the rest of it's not worth a wank really

 

[Tad]

Just stuck the news on and parliament is on. My god. What a bunch of idiots this country is ran by. There all as bad as each other. Arguing like school children. It's pathetic. They all deserve to be thrown out.

Torres, Labour, Lib Dem; none of them deserve there pay packet or roles.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Just stuck the news on and parliament is on. My god. What a bunch of idiots this country is ran by. There all as bad as each other. Arguing like school children. It's pathetic. They all deserve to be thrown out.

Torres, Labour, Lib Dem; none of them deserve there pay packet or roles.

Torres? Harsh to single him out but I suppose he doesn't deserve his pay, nor his role of striker for Chelsea...

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Just stuck the news on and parliament is on. My god. What a bunch of idiots this country is ran by. There all as bad as each other. Arguing like school children. It's pathetic. They all deserve to be thrown out.

Torres, Labour, Lib Dem; none of them deserve there pay packet or roles.

Probably spent the whole session praising Wills for smashing it.