Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
shouldn't be allowed an extended weekend, or extra pay for working over it.
glad we all agree.
It's a huge part of our culture and tradition and I think it's great that we still celebrate it.
my culture and tradition is massive and the royalty bit is but a small part, on the whole authority and modern 'progress' has stamped all over my culture and tradition.
Thank you, but you cannot speak for other peoples culture and tradition
Ones culture and tradition is a matter of perception I guess. For me, the royals have a good place within what I would view as my culture. I guess if you're Scottish then you might argue gaelic dancing is more a part of your culture.
and as an individual, for whom the royals don't just mean fuck all, but represent something distasteful and archaic, I resent being tarred with this.
and largely comes down to your opinion of it. You don't like/believe in the royals so you don't think they are a part of your heritage, that's fine.
I'm sure someone who is a priest would include the church as a big part of their heritage, but someone who does not believe in god and has never been to church probably wouldn't do this.
perception of the country and from your own opinions of different elements of that country.
what's your /point/?
just because you don't believe in it. Sure, you may not use it to define your own culture/heritage, but it doesn't mean it doesn't have its place somewhere.
most of us actually had mostly very poor ancestors
but most people are not made to fully be aware of it, if most people were fully aware of it then they would be less fond of british history (Im not just picking on Britain here it happens everywhere that gets developed)
and please remember that I am actually not rabidly anti
But none of it is a justification for the monarchy having any place in our future.
I resent the idea of a 'British' culture. I am a Briton, so by using this term and stating what it means, you define *me*.
It's a huge part of our culture and tradition
quotes > & the point was answered above, what ever
I meant the royal family is
- Terence McKenna
Do people who moan about the royals get a let off of paying tax to support them? No they do not.....so you are completely wrong
although I think it was more of a joke than anything else. I just don't like people who complain about the royal family.
give it to me in a nutshell
It's become an INTERNET SERIOUS DEBATE buzzword that nobody would have used or even heard of before the days of wasting time arguing with total strangers about religion or moon hoax or whatever on some forum you joined to talk about indie music, but yeah.
but i'm busy fiddling with myself and thinking about a shower.
but as an idea and the rest as individuals well I would moan about them.
As I always say, the queen is a good diplomat who has not let her diplomacy drop (unlike all other political diplomats).
I think she probably takes her role seriously and sometimes is made to behave in a way that she is not happy with. The others do not seem to have traded as much, in restraint of personal behaviour, in return for the enormous privilage that they receive (i.e. they do not all seem to treat it seriously as a job....the queen does)
in terms of other royals, i'd say prince william and harry are doing alright. They do a fair bit for charity, are in the military and above all are good figureheads/examples for others to look up to. I think they both did well on their jubilee tours aswell (from what i saw obviously)
I dont consider these two as they are still formulative, also Im consider the unpleasentness that they have had in their life with regard to their mum and dads breakup and then her death, I feel it would be unfair of me to judge them too much...................but when you say they do their fair bit for charity, what do you mean? how much?
remember in their case it is not them being charitable, it is them performing their jobs
But still whether or not they have to do it still doesn't change the fact that they are patrons for charities they chose themselves and being the patron for that charity alone does a hell of a lot for them.
They have had some pretty tough times in their childhood, but I think they've emerged into a time of prosperity now.
...that Princess Anne performs the highest number of public engagements of all the royals.
She gets to kick back being Princess Royal, no commitment to have to go on the throne in her life, just mince around being all royal.
that at least a few people try (although its still elitist, there are a lot more people that try it than phillips horse and coach racing :D)
what does this have to do with anything?
Poor people, for example.
having less days holiday merely because they moan about the royals.......dont you?
Bit of piss overflowing from a urinal never hurt anyone.
as being patiotic?
Shes no dad of mine ;D
were all married to high profile Nazi officers before WWII?
Didn't Prince Phillip go to Hermann Goerrings wedding?
we should be given a totally separate holiday instead, called 'Repulic Weekend' or something else instead. Like it.
but the complete obsessives who live through the royals vicariously via Grazia magazine or idk freak me out, and they're out in force at the moment. It's exactly the same as people watching TOWIE or Made in Chelsea - people watching other people's lives play out instead of living.
It's moronic, but it's not the royals' fault.
That other stuff sounds exhausting.
These people probably don't make up 0.000000000000000000000001% of the population.
And the soaring sales of magazines whenever the royals are featured brushing their fucking teeth says differently.
But you know, anecdotal evidence probably bests me, right?
Perhaps you should change the sort of people you knock about with.
I don't know one magazine-loving, TOWIE-watching Royalist, personally, but each to their own.
It's way too easy-going a week to rise to it. I have a hell of a Jubilee weekend to get on with.
:D fuck the royals :D
Because people just assume that because you watch TOWIE and MIC that you're thick and have no life. And I don't get it. Its fluff TV. Some people like to watch fluff TV.
I don't think anyone should be judged on what they watch in their spare time. It doesn't make them up as a person and it doesn't mean they can't enjoy programs that the rest of you watch.
Are you watching the new series of Snog Marry Avoid? I love it. The post-Jenny Frost refresh is a triumph. This is not a joke, btw. It's easily one of my favourite programmes on telly.
I will be catching up on it though. I do love that show.
Jenny Frost doesn't do it anymore??!?
Not sure if the new woman is known for anything else.
Always thought it was a bit hypocritical of The Frost to bang on about natural beauty when she had her roots showing. :-)
I like the monarchy.
Actually, you can dislike being British if you want. You'd be utterly wrong, of course, as it's brilliant.
The Weather (the seasons)
but one thing you always say when talking about this is that "you are more interested in real people that you really know and have a good time with" or something on those lines.
well i dont think that you really know the royals or anything
;D (Im being cruel, I have no point to make here)
Those EDL people
Litter bugs (lots of litter in UK)
Can't grow bananas here
the engineering heritage
being an island
It's only when you go abroad that you realise we have quite a good heritage and culture. I'd also add 'tolerence' to the list
the notion of patriotism, of loving your country like a person, warts and all, despite any acts of war/terror/piracy commited in the name of your country.
the way patriotism feeds xenophobic attitudes towards other countries.
what WZA said.
wrists broken from all the excessive wringing we need to do for all our ancestor's past sins?
So can never be accused of it.
but I would die to defend your right to say it
What even is Britishness, I've always founded it weird that the general public puts so much stock in it (like being anti Europe etc) when it seems to me compared to many places in Europe that still have strong traditions and national identities in Britain we really don't , just a load of international chain stores and American pop culture
The United Kingdom: dislike.
Being British, in social and geographical terms: aye, I like it.
I'd actually welcome the option to work in Tuesday for the exact reason it feels like having the day off feels like enforced celebration of something I don't believe in. It's only one day hardly a massive bonus
and was bought half a bitter shandy by a stranger as a reward.
There's no way I would want to deprive a 13 year old of this generation of the opportunities that I had.
it probably undermines your point if you're continually giving people little pictures of the Queen
when I was in London last weekend I made sure to always tap in/out face-down.
I mean do you like say Henry VIII?
who is one of the most famous and colourful kings
who had people tortured most horribly to extract confessions to satisfy his bedroom requirements
who had people killed for no other reason that they stood in his way?
With this rich pageantry that you are celebrating, do you conveniantly forget the more bloodthirsty Edwards?
Do you forget all the family killings
Do you forget the killing of our poor ancesters, just to take their land (when the poor ancesteres only had enough to support themselves whereas the court had excess?)
how can you seriously love it as a culture when it has had such unpleasentaries, where it shows that the 'metal' of a monarch has not been superior to others, other than a surviving monarch (from the past when they were 'involved') might have some of the metal of a more ruthless sort of political leader?
well he wasnt really in this country at all, it is doubtful if he even spoke english very much at all
Alfred - an oaf who completely disregarded the priorities of the ordinary folk ....cakes mean more to us than royalty (see also marie antoinette) ;D
Royal family during WWI were cousins of the kaiser, changed name from Saxe-Coberg to Mountbatton-Windsor cos it sounded more british, but refused to help the cousin Tsars family.
You cannot isolate the 'tradition and culture' that you trumpet from these historical events if you are going to go on about history and tradition.
the taking of common land and taxation from our ancestors, the feudal system etc means that more of our ancester levels would have been oppressed by monarchs rather than granted boons by them.
I love the land and Im b*gg**ed if Im happy about some nonce with a shotgun having loads of wilderness to do whatever they like in just because of some law or contracts that I have not consented to.
It's like saying if you're German you can't like Germany and the country, because of WWII.
Sure, bad things have happened in the past, but it's what it stands for now.
garish clothes, lots of money, soldiers standing in lines and marching with highly polished stuff, parades and pomp.
In a time of extreme austerity, food shelter heating and security should be the more important concerns upon which to invest money, any resultant tourism boost will be to tacky souvenier sellers and makers, overpriced hotels and accomodations, things that are not of any longterm use to a country that is well in the s**t.
the Germans generally carry a great and terrible sense of shame/guilt about their military atrocities, whereas ours are glorified as a part of a 'proud' military/naval tradition.
You can be patriotic about being from a country or a people and admit the problems of the past. FFS, slavery is a pretty big blight on the map for all civilizations, and you can't ignore it. No one is saying we are ignoring it.
You are talking a load of old shite creaky, sorry.
I was aguing against the idea that it is our 'tradition'
you are so wrong to say I am talking rubbish
BECAUSE above all things the thing that the royalists like to point oput is the 'longevity of the line'
they love all the stuarts and the tudors and all that nonsense.
I was arguing about the 'tradition'
tradition means going back a long way.....with the monarchy the royalists like to go back to william I (a rather bloodthirsty and violent unpleasent man) If anything I would rather the tradition of the royal family was descended from harold (who sounds marginally more caring towards people than william)
tradition implies that it is engrained in a country more than just by the current incarnation, and in that respect
the tradition that we inherit
THE TRADITION I IHNHERITED
was that I was born to a mum with nothing who worked really hard as a servant to people who were no better than her and who were less honest than her, in this modern incarnation some other people were born with large wealth and tracts of land....I always loved the land and longed for a garden in which to be able to grow stuff.
from an early age i wondered why it was that a lot of the open land was owned anyway, why didnt it belong to whoever wanted to wonder in it?
my tradition is hearing nonsense stories about people who snatched stuff from others being worshiped by others, who seemd to act far more humanely than many of these monarchs, my tradition is wondering why people were so keen to try to find ancestors who were linked to these people rather than finding out about their ordinary ancestors
Im baffled as to why you are not angry at the injustices meted out to your poor ancestors by nobs..........most of your ancestors from the past century would have been poor
as I have already shown that I am not rabidly anti, nor have i used any such language in countering any pro monarchists.
the post you say i am talking 'sh**e' in was talking about tradition relating to a specific thing....royaltys traditions is very specifically also about the longevity and going back
in fact how dare you deny that it is valid for me to bring up 'old history' when it is precisely 'old history' that many royalist traditionalists indulge in. The 'oldness' being one of the defining feature of the british monarchy.
Of course I do not blame the current monarchy for past events. of course i do not think they should be thought od negatively as individuals for that.
I am trying to say that the hoo har that will surround monarchy celebrations WILL include much harping on about old historical monarchy stuff.....you can deny this if you like, but i am sure that I will be able to slap you in the face with evidence of this were i to video media coverage of 'royalty' and tradition and culture in the next week or so
I am defending their position in moaning about monarchy.
I am not attacking the queen, I never do, and I always state why, giving a reason that i feel is more difficult to argue with, than just defending the institution of monarchy.
If someone did an all out attack on the queen I would defend her, because of her individual merit of the way that she has fullfilled the diplomatic role
that's kind of cute.
how many more of my words must be put into these things! <3 funny lookin' mole though.
I didn't know where to start with that one. Turns out that a LOLmole is all that's needed. :-)
should have massive pay to keep the country going while the Royalists have a party?
So, so naive.
How much does the Queen cost the taxpayer? About a quid per year.
That's less than I give the tramps.
Don't arrest racists: studies show that they work for less money!
Gays aren't spending enough on the high street: go easy on the homophobes this weekend, officer!
thats the royals
Personally I think we should scrap the monarchy, not because it costs me 70p a year (which is too little to really get angry about) but because it goes against the idea we are all created equal. The divine right of kings died a long time ago but we keep the Royal Family out of tradition, its a completely dated concept.
The Queen isn't special, she's just an old woman who's being doing the same job for 60 years; give her a gold watch and send her on her way.
yours is better.
Since were all create equal, natch, it would be wrong to accept our parents assets on their deaths since so many others don't have these advantages.
No the Queen isn't 'special' but she's our special representative. If she doesn't want to do the job anymore then she can and will be told to fuck off and will no longer enjoy the privilages. It's not like there's this clan of gangsters in control of the monarchy like there is in other countries.
The fact that she was born into it works in her favour to me - she didn't have to climb to the top of the greasy pole by shitting on those below.
Inheriting rule over a country = leaving your grandkids a few quid to pay for their tuition fees?
We don't live under martial rule. So be thankful for that, and abandon all further critical thought.
All politicians ever have shat on everyone. The US pres is the only type of pres. The Irish pres doesn't exist. And whilst we're yakking about Ireland - they've been an inferior nation ever since they ditched our
What with them all being bare knuckle gypsy fighters. Right?
When you put some of this stuff into plain English it really does highlight just how cringey and flimsy the line of argument is, huh?
being a head of state should be down to talent, perseverance and free elections, not the fact that you came out of a powerful head of states baby hole.
Granted ol' Queenie is alright, and I'm quite fond of William, but it's the principle of the thing.
If so, how do you reconcile that position?
Ok. Let's open this one up.
Can /anyone/ find any justification for Catholics being classed as inferior beings by the very highest level of our society?
And as a (sort of) Catholic who is also a (sort of) Royalist I don;t find it that difficult to understand, and pretty hard to get upset about. When you have a state religion, it demands a primary place in all institutions.
But what about all the countries she heads that don't have a state religion?
And it only serves to reinforce the question further still. The Royalists have all gone quiet on it though.
But it's probably a bit inflamatory, right?
And I like the fact that I'm having a long weekend because of them.
Say what you like about them, but they do a lot of charity work (Prince's Trust do amazing stuff, for one) and they are very good for bringing tourism to our country, thus good for our economy and the general perception of Britain on the world stage. Americans, in particular, love all this royal stuff. They can't get enough of it.
The Diana stuff was a bit much though.
Besides, if we got rid of the monarchy, that would makes us exactly like France. And who wants that?
And when Liz dies, Bill Gates becomes king.
And if we didn't have a monarchy we'd have to bulldoze and burn all the historic buildings and artifacts in Britain.
to do autographs and public mock-ceremonies every day, charge shitloads of money for tickets. pretty sure american tourists would be WELL more into that than the technicality of having an actual monarchy. sorted.
PRIVATISE THE ROYALS. genuinely a good idea.
To make money from tourism?
BLAADY YUROPEEN UNYARN INNIT MATE, FACKIN FARAAANARS AND FROGS ALL OVER THE SHOP. DON'T WANT NO FANCYPANTS CRUSSON FOR BREAKFAST GIMME A BACON SARNIE. FACKIN GAY FRENCHIES
And I'm from Manchester, and thus don't have a cockney accent. Dick.
form of passion
Just come out looking like the biggest bunch of tosspots, don't they?
NB: Cementimental kinda has the dispassionate, end of thread roundup thing going on.
But have some aloof points for trying anyway. Even if you're the sixteenth person this week to try that line.
Cement-'often replies to his own posts several hours later because he thought of more fnar fnar'-mental?
I like Cementimental, btw.
I try and think of reasons for both sides to figure out where I stand, then I start to get sleepy and decide "meh"
Cheers for the points though...
saying 'citizen not subject' to wear to work because her colleagues are all royalists.
luckily, it was too small.
obese people and smokers shouldn't get treatment on the NHS.
Drunks in A&E should though. Or they should drop a supplementary tenner in a collection point somewhere every time.
I think I've mentioned this before, but there's a shop in the town my mother lives in called LE FLOWER BOUTIQUE (really)
drove past it today and they had loads of Union Jack bunting up
LE FLOWER BOUTIQUE
covered in Union Jack bunting
le flower boutique. my word.
I have GCSE French, dontcha know. Shouldn't it be be "La Boutique Fleur". Someone correct me please.
would be more correct (i think).
worst scrounger of the lot
Get a real job and stop stealing from the state, Queenie
has anyone said about prince andrew and the arms trade yet?
for what he has posted in this thread
theWza would have been dragged to his place of execution hung till severley strangled, but still well enough alive, he would then have his privy bits cut off and burned on a fire in his sight, he would then have his intestines removewd and burnt in his sight, his heart would be removed and he would then be quartered and his 4 parts distributed around the kingdom.
Actually it eould happen to a lot of people in this thread.
Although the women would just be burnt
Edward I introduced the first the hang/draw/quarter, but it was more codified under his grandson
the marvellous much admired elizabeth I had quite a few catholics death tortured this way. her dad seemed to be heavily personally closely involved in muc horrid killing.... you know why? he was a heartless bastard
of course poor mark smeaton was a simple musician, a commoner and so what other purpose could he serve other than to be a device of the kings whim, even if it means doing most horrid things to his body
and then it gets worse
Henry was a monster....and yet he has been sanitised, somehow.
thankfully the tudors didnt skimp on bringing the torture and horror to a personal level, but the prog still managed to make henrys life seem like a romp....so that these scenes are matched/cancelled by a feisty sexual romp or two........which is fucking ridiculous.
People really need to look at our history with bright clean eyes.
People in this country describe people like genghis khan and the mongols as being barbaric cos of the way they treat people......200 years and much later after genghis 'civilised' britain was formally (legally) torturing to death in the most sadistic ways, sometimes for trivialities, or even on knowingly false accusations like poor smeaton.
I hate the fucking arrogance of 'FALSE patriotism' when it forgets the behaviour of its own country in the past but is quite willing to condemn as barbaric other countries pasts and cultures history.
srsly what sane person could describe the mongols as being barbaric given this countries past. and yet victorian writers were full of it.......... ooooh hark at me harking back to the past, when sheeldz and such say I shouldnt....how it is inappropriate........well then tell that to the fucking loony monarchists that DO KEEP HARKING back to victorian times as being a time of good sense and the wonderful Victoria......oh yes please tell me.....what exactly did she do? (lucky old her,the rozzers didnt try to break down her door to arrest HER for taking narcotics)
sum up - the queen is a good diplomat and is useful for some foreign diplomacy - the rest of it is bollocks - sure if you want a pageant with pretty shiny things then go for it...im a party girl, I like glitter (its quite cheap though) -
but PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not hark on about tradition or values, or anything more meaningful than mass make believe, take them at face value.
and the reason that I have got so het up?
because of the enormous censure and made up awfulness that people attribute to you if you fail to find it all awesome (its not as bad now as it used to be, but it used to be like you were a 5th columist)
and now i feel uncomfortable, because i over-extended myself and no one is posting underneath, its at times like this that I worry that I've gone too far and embarrased myself
All the bugles that you will see were handmade by my uncle.