Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
This country still has a monarchy.
Pretty sad really isnt it.
Alot of European countries had revolutions in the 18th and 19th centuries getting rid of absolute monarchies etc. England and Britain have had no such recent revolutions. England had 1066 then magna carta in 1215 then a civil war in the 1640s and a so-called Glorious Revolution in 1688. Power since then has been essentially transferred from the monarch to parliment and its people (even though the people feel that they don't have any power half the time).
It does mean i get to have a Princess in my classes though, which is nice.
not prince andrew.
get a more relevant cause, jesus
for a start
which one REALLY IS radiohead's best album???
- child poverty
- racism, homophobia, sexism, ageism
- repression, murder and torture in Burma
- rape and sexual assault, more relevantly the fact so few accusations result in trial, let alone conviction
- fucking...anything to do with environmental degradation and climate change
- in fact, any country where what we consider basic human rights are denied to the population
- do you get the picture yet?
- grow up.
also by obscure, sometimes observed artificial protocol or by whoever suited other blokes that fancied a bit of power brokering, kind of a few sort of arcane factors (none of which look like gods will though...even if you believed in god)
despite the troubles she has with her problem family members
thank you for posting this twice
Obviuosly having a constuitutional monarch and all that represents has nothing to do with what we let our government get away with in our names does it.
affect our civil liberties? It's not the queen who's infringing our civil liberties, it's Jacqui Smith and the other new labour authoritarians.
are you really really thick or something?
anything carried out by this country is effectively carried out by her majestys government.
We may vote for the goverment but bloodlines and silly traditions dictate who is our monarch.
she doesn't have any actual power. at all.
compared to the money it would take to even begin tackling any of theose problem. Seriously, I did the calculations last time this debate came up. The Royal Family's annual income amounted to approx 0.001% of the gov't expenditure on education and healthcare. Hardly a great saving, eh?
do you not think the fact I bothered to trawl government websites for spending figures indicates I'm not apathetic, but have well thought out opinions that happen to differ with yours?
I reckon thats a pretty apathetic statement.
The fact you looked it up proves you looked at wikipedia probably.
Here's where I got the spending figures from
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/pbr_csr07_index.htm (NB: not wikipedia)
Lets not get rid of them becuase we'll only save 000000.1% yadda yadda.
Still a lot of fucking moeny which could help towards the problems you list above.
the NHS or school system as they are, I doubt you'd see much for your money. You could make much more substantial savings if you actually reformed the state allocates and spends money, cutting red tape etc.
Anyway, my basic point is, the financial aspect of abolishing the monarchy is basically moot. Whatever the advantages or disadvantages, they are likely to be pretty small.
because of the sheer size of the government budget for things like education and health care, you could make much larger savings by allocating resources there than by dissolving the Crown, which for all I've said about the queen's lack of de jure power, would nonetheless be an extremely politically and constitutionally divisive move. I'm not saying you couldn't save a tinsy bit of money by getting rid of 'em 9but even that isn't certain), but rather that the small scale of saving compared to savings you could make elsewhere and the constitutional significance of the move render the financial argument for it moot (or at best, very weak indeed).
to speak from.
But then why do we still have a monarch.
And we do still give them a lot of money.
Which could probably go towards helping with some of the problems listed by people above.
Yet we dont do anything about it.
For me this sort of highlights a fundamental problem with this counrty.
And people always say there are bigger problems so its not important.
the monarch hasn't refused assent to an act of parliament since 1707. Whatever the constitutional technicalities, the reality is Parliament is sovereign and the queen cannot oppose its will.
to come up with something that isn't infinitely more awful
I said she cannot refuse to give assent to acts of parliament. There's something of a difference.
Y - buuut it's largely a symbolic one. However, one could at least concieve of a situation in which she might exercise prerogative and strike down an act, e.g. if Parliament tried to universally suspend habeus corpus etc etc.
Admittedly, a pretty dull essay
BUT because no law can be validly enacted without royal assent, we'd presumably have to dissolve the current Parliament and government, draft a new constitution, argue over it a lot, put it to a referendum - meanwhile, all legislative activities would be stalled, and I imagine some kind of transitional committe would assume executive control.
The process would be long, expensive and pretty tumultuous. It definately wouldn't be a case of just kicking her out of bucingham palace and taking her land.
and hence not fit to ground such a fundamental constitution shift. A future government could repeal it either expressly, or just ingore it in which case it would be impliedly repealed.
You'd have to dissolve Parliament, like when the Parliament of England was dissolved and replaced with the Parliament of the UK.
Constitutional and administrative law 101.
it doesn't make any difference to anything at all. nothing! absolutely nothing whatsoever!
They give Grans something to talk about at the hairdresser when they're getting their perms done.
Also, I would quite like the Channel 4 series of the same name on DVD as a Christmas present. Maybe.
That is all.
imagine growing up in NZ and Australia, where she's still the nominal head of state. I could not be more convinced that NZ should become a republic - it's beyond ridiculous in the 21st century that she remains, even technically, the head of state of a country on the other side of the world which she has visited twice since 1990.
Is that there German and they own literally tens of billions of pounds worth of British proprty, huge swathes of central London property is on hundred year leases that are owned by various earls and lords - They should all be stripped of this immediately and the proceeds spent stuff we actually need:
civil liberties (not to sure what this means)
terrorism (No - Your more likey to die in your bath than through terrorism)
iraq, afghanistan (Just afghanistan)
The Queen is German? Even though she was born in England, her parents were born in England, and all her grandparents were born in England?
I'd be interested to hear your views on, say, people of African, Asian or Caribbean descent who regard themselves as English.
to montbatton windsor or summat.
Also he kind of disowned his cousins (kaiser and tsar) and didnt offer refuge/suppoort to his cousins family allowing them to be killed (although bizarrely allowing britain to help encourage the extended war in russia (between white and red)
Also I think that lizards can make this point....as the one time air to the thrown, edward, did side against the national interest in WWII and put himself up to reign if the nazis won, so i feel that he has a sort of point.
Its Not something to fell totally proud of i would have thought.....our queen though ,is different, seems to be doing her job as well as she feels she can, she is more diplomatic than any politician i can think of
EPIC LOGIC FAIL
is that we don't have to put up with members of ex-imperial houses STILL PRETENDING THAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO THINGS like you get in a lot of European countries.
we still have an aristocratic system. france, germany, russia etc don't, yet the remnants of the former imperial houses still refer to themselves by their titles. even though those titles are essentially meaningless.
to come up with a sketch of BRINE HAW hanging out of a Buckingham Palace window while a disgruntled Queen sits outside amongst protest signs.
That is the most pointless shit in the world, last year I was a bloody hour late for work cos I couldn't walk from Piccadily through St James Park cos there were fucking police protecting soliders protecting the road that the queen was going to ride down in four hours time. knobs the lots of them. (I had to skirt back through Admirality arch round the front of Horse Guards all the way down to westminster palace before cutting back to petit france)