DS Forums

 
 

When Australia removes the royal family could the uk follow suit?


View Poll Results: Do you support the royal family?
no,under 30 6 4.72%
no, 30+ 50 39.37%
yes, under 30 15 11.81%
yes 30+ 56 44.09%
Voters: 127. You can't vote on this poll right now - are you signed in?

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 29-12-2016, 15:21
jjwales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,421
As with so many things in the UK I'm left with a choice of least worst. I don't suport the royal family in any kind of flag waving way but I'd rather that than someone from the UKs political scene who could only be more divisive without bringing in any wealth or good will from elsewhere, which the royal family at least contribute to.
So make it a non-political post. And as it would be largely ceremonial, there is little scope for the holder to be divisive.
jjwales is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 29-12-2016, 15:22
jmclaugh
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Devon
Posts: 47,965
The ideology of having a head of state who is democratically elected? I can easily see the point there.
If you want a democratically elected powerless figurehead fine.
jmclaugh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:26
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
The royal family are a bunch of parasites living off the backs of the British people. They may bring in a few tourists and act as a figure head, but oxygen thieves like Andrew have done nothing more than show contempt for people since leaving the forces. They may be using their "own" money, but they stole that from other people over centuries and are no more worthy as people than anyone else.

I would say cut the spending, nationalise their assets and make them get proper jobs they can support themselves with, or live on the same benefits as everyone else. Let the QE2 and probable successors (Charles, William, George) keep their titles and have a few ceremonial duties, but all the rest should live normal lives.
However if you compare the income generated by the Crown Estates to what those on the Civil List receive, they more that pay for themselves as the former far exceeds the latter.

As for "the rest" living normal lives, more and more of them are with Princess Anne's children, Zara and Peter, being perfect examples.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:28
paulschapman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 24,724
The way things are I would like the monarchy to have more of a say in political matters. Perhaps given a veto in some policy areas.
err... they do have a veto in policy areas - while it has not been done for 200 years the monarch still has to sign acts of parliament and she can refuse. The last time is was considered was over the independence of Ireland - that led to the creation of Eire.

The monarch can also say if a subject cannot be debated in the house of commons, which is what happened when Tony Blair wanted to debate the right of the government and not the monarch to declare war (only the monarch can actually declare war).
paulschapman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:29
jjwales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,421
If you want a democratically elected powerless figurehead fine.
A democratically elected head of state need not be completely powerless. The Irish president has some limited powers, and if we followed that example they would have legitimacy to use them.
jjwales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:32
Maxatoria
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 10,732
Would the crown estates return to the retiring monarch as i'm sure they're still technically owned by the monarch so if she did retire the state would still have to pay for the upkeep of all the places like Buck Palace.

She'd be minted 2-3 private estates and a few hundred million a year income and zero responsibilities other than keeping the corgi's under control.
Maxatoria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:37
Morlock
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,087
However if you compare the income generated by the Crown Estates...
The Crown Estate consists of assets expropriated from common people. The monarchy should redress this injustice, dissolve itself and give its assets back to the public to which it rightly belongs.
Morlock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:38
smudges dad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort William
Posts: 22,266
However if you compare the income generated by the Crown Estates to what those on the Civil List receive, they more that pay for themselves as the former far exceeds the latter.

As for "the rest" living normal lives, more and more of them are with Princess Anne's children, Zara and Peter, being perfect examples.
Are you going to explain how they got the Crown Estates? Was it by hard work and effort, or did they just steal them from other people or just took them over?
smudges dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:43
Maxatoria
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 10,732
Are you going to explain how they got the Crown Estates? Was it by hard work and effort, or did they just steal them from other people or just took them over?
Thank William the first as he got em in 1066 by the right of conquest.
Maxatoria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:45
smudges dad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort William
Posts: 22,266
Thank William the first as he got em in 1066 by the right of conquest.
So you accept they were stolen by brute force?
smudges dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:48
Maxatoria
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 10,732
So you accept they were stolen by brute force?
Is there some conspiracy theory that he didn't park up from Normandy with a lot of men and horses and defeat who was there?

We probably could go back to about 10,000BC when Ugg got his cave taken over by ZZUG the strong.
Maxatoria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:52
smudges dad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort William
Posts: 22,266
Is there some conspiracy theory that he didn't park up from Normandy with a lot of men and horses and defeat who was there?

We probably could go back to about 10,000BC when Ugg got his cave taken over by ZZUG the strong.
No, I'm just pointing out that getting things by right of conquest is the same as stealing by using brute force.

As an aside, land ownership is an interesting philosophical point, but this is not really the place to discuss it.
smudges dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:02
kidspud
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,488
Are you going to explain how they got the Crown Estates? Was it by hard work and effort, or did they just steal them from other people or just took them over?
You are trying to roll up the whole of history and somehow blame the royals.

How has anyone ended up with any land or natural resource?

However, it is a fact that the royals and the government of this land came to an agreement which suited everyone. If you tear up that agreement, maybe we should tear up every property deed, contract, etc.
kidspud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:56
Steve9214
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,547
Two words... Donald and Trump

Having someone who is not elected but has been prepared for the role of Head of State their whole life is actually very stabilising and appealing for me.

Anyone who actually wanted to be an elected Head of State ought to be excluded for those same exact reasons.
Steve9214 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 17:03
lemoncurd
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bristol
Posts: 46,964
The Crown Estate consists of assets expropriated from common people. The monarchy should redress this injustice, dissolve itself and give its assets back to the public to which it rightly belongs.
Ooh, baggsy Highgrove! I don't need anything too big and that's convenient for work.
lemoncurd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 17:15
The infidel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,036
The monarchy has been a symbol of stability for this country and generally it is the extreme left who see them as a symbol of the British state that they detest. If her majesty herself rid the world and hunger and desease overnight they would still find reasons to take cheap pot-shots at them from the side lines. This is why the left must never again be allowed to take control over the government of this country. I find anyone who objects to the monarchy is also a European Nationalist, hard-line socialist union supporter and in fact support any cause that harms this country in any way.
The infidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 17:46
jjwales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,421
Two words... Donald and Trump

Having someone who is not elected but has been prepared for the role of Head of State their whole life is actually very stabilising and appealing for me.

Anyone who actually wanted to be an elected Head of State ought to be excluded for those same exact reasons.
Because you wouldn't find them stabilising or appealing? Up to you, but it wouldn't bother me!
jjwales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 17:58
TeeGee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dark Satanic Mills
Posts: 4,809
So you accept they were stolen by brute force?
I am not too strong on History. Remind me which of the kings of Scotland were elected?
TeeGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 18:20
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,666
The Crown Estate consists of assets expropriated from common people. The monarchy should redress this injustice, dissolve itself and give its assets back to the public to which it rightly belongs.
I take it you will be happy for whatever land you own or where you house sits must then be traced back to its original owners and you will have to leave it ? As most land built on by developers for years is land sold by councils which they got from government which they got over the years as it was taken from people hundreds of years ago.

And as for giving it back to the public, other than 15% of the profits which go to run the offices of Head of State what do you want given back exactly ? the rest of the profits already go the government.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 19:16
smudges dad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort William
Posts: 22,266
I am not too strong on History. Remind me which of the kings of Scotland were elected?
What a strange question!
Remember that the Scottish kings took over the English throne (James VI and I). Still doesn't make the royals special in any way..
smudges dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 19:28
InMyArms
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 39,221
The thread title and poll ask two different things.
InMyArms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 19:31
alan29
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,480
Could do.
Won't.
alan29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 19:38
SULLA
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,029

If they try it, we will have to invade.
SULLA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 19:45
BRITLAND
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 3,219
I fully expect British republicanism to spike when Charles is King, whether it is abolished is anyone's guess but I wouldn't rule it out happening in the 2030s or later, anything can happen then.
BRITLAND is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-12-2016, 02:07
dodrade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,106
Australia already had a referendum in 1999 (when the Royal family were at a low end post-Diana) and the Republicans lost. Even Turnbull admits they have no chance while the Queen is alive.
dodrade is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:34.