The Royal Wedding

[Brigandier]

All true, but imagine the monarchs we'd end up with.

Much of the same, except Beatrice would be deposed by a Kardashian.

 

[HAL9000]

Much of the same, except Beatrice would be deposed by a Kardashian.

I'd take beatrice over a Kardashian any day of the week. D:

 

[Brigandier]

I'd take beatrice over a Kardashian any day of the week. D:

I probably would too, and I don't even know anything about her (other than her Dune hat). Are their any good websites that would get one caught up on the royal gossip?

 

[HAL9000]

I probably would too, and I don't even know anything about her (other than her Dune hat). Are their any good websites that would get one caught up on the royal gossip?

I don't know much about her either, but I'd take an unknown over a kardashian any time.

Alas I know nothing about royal gossip sites, I'm sure they exist.

 

[Brigandier]

However much the UK may pay the royalty, America gives Hollywood a lot more money, and loves to bitch about it too!

 

[CanOWorms]

However much the UK may pay the royalty, America gives Hollywood a lot more money, and loves to bitch about it too!

The government does not force individuals to recognize acting dynasties and fund them and their lifestyles. Monarchs should be deposed, stripped of titles and government resources. If individuals want to celebrate a monarch in their own private capacity, they can do that. But the caste system would be abolished and everyone would be treated equally by the government.

That is how many modern countries treat their former monarchs.

 

[Brigandier]

The government does not force individuals to recognize acting dynasties and fund them and their lifestyles. Monarchs should be deposed, stripped of titles and government resources. If individuals want to celebrate a monarch in their own private capacity, they can do that. But the caste system would be abolished and everyone would be treated equally by the government.

That is how many modern countries treat their former monarchs.

Don't worry, the royals cannot enter the house of commons(the house of representatives), they may have the house of (what is it?) lords on lock down, but if the UK people wanted to rise up, they would.

Edit: The bicameral legislature is pretty tight.

 

[CanOWorms]

Don't worry, the royals cannot enter the house of commons(the house of representatives), they may have the house of (what is it?) lords on lock down, but if the UK people wanted to rise up, they would.

Edit: The bicameral legislature is pretty tight.

Lots of people in the UK want to abolish the monarchy. They simply seek equality.

 

[Brigandier]

Lots of people in the UK want to abolish the monarchy. They simply seek equality.

I know it, and I support them. Ireland and Scotland would cosign that shit in an INSTANT. It just never happens to be brought up, but it's OK to me, it does bring people to England. How many Americans' dreams are to try and make the guard smile? That is a lot of money, each year to England.

I'm sure it's not limited, I'm sure French tourists fart on them, to get a rise. It all makes money. How much do you think that SP Episode made? A lot for people not in England, some for them in residual impact.

 

[dennilfloss]

The monarchy might get abolished in the UK but chances are very strong it won't in Canada.

You would need a motion for a special constitutional amendment by the House of Commons, of a kind that needs to be supported unanimously by all ten provinces. The Senate cannot veto this special amendment but can the Upper House postpone it for 180 days for cooler heads to prevail.

 

[CanOWorms]

I know it, and I support them. Ireland and Scotland would cosign that shit in an INSTANT. It just never happens to be brought up, but it's OK to me, it does bring people to England. How many Americans' dreams are to try and make the guard smile? That is a lot of money, each year to England.

I'm sure it's not limited, I'm sure French tourists fart on them, to get a rise. It all makes money. How much do you think that SP Episode made? A lot for people not in England, some for them in residual impact.

The UK can still have the Guards without a monarchy. These things are easily detached from the discriminatory institutions itself.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I know it, and I support them. Ireland and Scotland would cosign that shit in an INSTANT. It just never happens to be brought up, but it's OK to me, it does bring people to England. How many Americans' dreams are to try and make the guard smile? That is a lot of money, each year to England.

I'm sure it's not limited, I'm sure French tourists fart on them, to get a rise. It all makes money. How much do you think that SP Episode made? A lot for people not in England, some for them in residual impact.

As as has been said, the UK could still have guards out. However, the UK actually doesn't make much money from the royals at all. There is no evidence of it.

In fact, the royals actually prevent the UK from earning more money. The reality is that of the top 20 tourist revenue generating spots in the UK, only one is even a royal residence. Imagine if Buckingham Palace was fully opened up to the public. It would probably be a top 5 tourist revenue spot as opposed to it not even being in the top 20 right now.

The only argument that the royalists really use is that it's tradition, that being racist and discriminatory is UK tradition. Well, I'd argue that racist and discriminatory traditions should end. Lots of countries have done this. The UK can do it if the people actually try.

 

[Brigandier]

As as has been said, the UK could still have guards out. However, the UK actually doesn't make much money from the royals at all. There is no evidence of it.

In fact, the royals actually prevent the UK from earning more money. The reality is that of the top 20 tourist revenue generating spots in the UK, only one is even a royal residence. Imagine if Buckingham Palace was fully opened up to the public. It would probably be a top 5 tourist revenue spot as opposed to it not even being in the top 20 right now.

The only argument that the royalists really use is that it's tradition, that being racist and discriminatory is UK tradition. Well, I'd argue that racist and discriminatory traditions should end. Lots of countries have done this. The UK can do it if the people actually try.

I understand and sympathize with all your points, but the fact is, England is a first world country, and one of the more lucrative countries in the EU. They have achieved what the world has, and more, and still maintained the monarchy. This is because of their limited Monarchy, tempered by the house of commons, of lords and the Prime Minister. The monarchy is superfluous, but I don't think it holds down the UK at all. I support its abolishment on principles of freedom and equality, I don't actually think the monarchy limits a Briton's success in life. I oppose the monarch as a matter of symbols, i.e., I oppose it at face value.

I can guarantee you their are a dozen or more social issues more pressing than the monarchy in the UK. A lot of your arguments are true, I just don't think they're true to the level you believe them to be.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I understand and sympathize with all your points, but the fact is, England is a first world country, and one of the more lucrative countries in the EU. They have achieved what the world has, and more, and still maintained the monarchy. This is because of their limited Monarchy, tempered by the house of commons, of lords and the Prime Minister. The monarchy is superfluous, but I don't think it holds down the UK at all. I support its abolishment on principles of freedom and equality, I don't actually think the monarchy limits a Briton's success in life. I oppose the monarch as a matter of symbols, i.e., I oppose it at face value.

I can guarantee you their are a dozen or more social issues more pressing than the monarchy in the UK. A lot of your arguments are true, I just don't think they're true to the level you believe them to be.

That's fine. At least you recognize the discriminatory aspects involved with the monarchy. I would argue that this would be a very simple one to fix, but obviously the people or the government don't have the will to do it.

 

[Brigandier]

That's fine. At least you recognize the discriminatory aspects involved with the monarchy. I would argue that this would be a very simple one to fix, but obviously the people or the government don't have the will to do it.

It exists, but is not simple to fix. To fix it, you'd have to have royals willing to marry outside their race and creed. That's a lot to ask from an upper-class white person, mixing is reserved for common folks the world over. The discrimination that exists in the English monarchy is representative of the discrimination that exists in the upper classes the world, and all classes in the third world.

 

[RabidMongoose]

It exists, but is not simple to fix. To fix it, you'd have to have royals willing to marry outside their race and creed. That's a lot to ask from an upper-class white person, mixing is reserved for common folks the world over. The discrimination that exists in the English monarchy is representative of the discrimination that exists in the upper classes the world, and all classes in the third world.

I would think that to fix it you would just depose the royals and replace the Head of State with something besides a Monarch. You don't have to force anyone to not be a racist. Instead, you just don't force the government and in effect the people to support the racist.

The current royals could then continue on with their racist beliefs and whatever else. People can look up to them, maybe donate to the family. However, they would no longer have official government positions or be supported by the people.