IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 8th February 2021, 02:24 PM   #1
Airfix
Graduate Poster
 
Airfix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,047
The Monarchy

Pros / cons ?

Should we hold a referendum on scrapping it?

How would you vote if we did ?
Airfix is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2021, 07:33 PM   #2
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 18,086
I am Canadian, so we actually share the monarchy with the UK.

I think we (as well as the UK) should keep it.

It is largely symbolic, so it doesn't HARM anything. Plus, I think there is value having a head of state that is above politics. (Imagine receiving some great honor like a knighthood, and having to receive it from Boris Johnson instead of the Queen...)

Also, I think some of the associated traditions (the pomp surrounding the throne speech, the ceremony around dissolving parliament, etc) adds character to politics.



Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2021, 07:42 PM   #3
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,585
Pros: It's tradition. / Cons: it costs money.

You should not hold a referendum.

If you did, I'd vote to keep it.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2021, 08:22 PM   #4
BazBear
Possible Suspect
 
BazBear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Stowe VT USA
Posts: 2,877
I, for one, am in favor of you keeping your shapeshifting reptilian overlords!
__________________
I don't see how an article of clothing can be indecent. A person, yes. - Robert A. Heinlein
If Christ died for our sins, dare we make his martyrdom meaningless by not committing them? - Jules Feiffer
If you are going through hell, keep going - Winston Churchill
BazBear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2021, 08:27 PM   #5
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Gundungurra
Posts: 10,522
Oh, I thought you were talking about the Tongan monarchy. The British one. OK, then...

As an Australian republican, I say: Keep it, scrap it, whatever. As long as we become a republic soon, without QE2 as Head of State.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 01:34 AM   #6
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,774
Throw 'em in the Tower.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 01:35 AM   #7
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,774
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
As long as we become a republic soon, without QE2 as Head of State.
Don't think she's gonna be your head of state for all that much longer.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 02:07 AM   #8
Ethan Thane Athen
Master Poster
 
Ethan Thane Athen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,329
Load of outdated nonsense, scrap it after Lizzie dies.
Ethan Thane Athen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 04:17 AM   #9
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Cons: it costs money.
Actually, it costs a lot less than people think. What people tend to forget is that the Government has access to the income from the Crown Estates, which is about $330 million a year.

They also assume that the Queen and family get paid by the Government, which was true under the deal that allowed the income of the Estates to go to the Government, however, in 2012 this deal ended and now the Royals get 25% of the income of the Estates and are paid nothing from the Government.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 04:20 AM   #10
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
On the whole, I prefer to have a titular Head of State who has been trained up for their entire life to do a job that is nothing more than a figurehead than to end up with someone like Trump who thinks that the role is all about power and making money.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 06:02 AM   #11
Carrot Flower King
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 1,573
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
I am Canadian, so we actually share the monarchy with the UK.

I think we (as well as the UK) should keep it.

It is largely symbolic, so it doesn't HARM anything. Plus, I think there is value having a head of state that is above politics. (Imagine receiving some great honor like a knighthood, and having to receive it from Boris Johnson instead of the Queen...)

Also, I think some of the associated traditions (the pomp surrounding the throne speech, the ceremony around dissolving parliament, etc) adds character to politics.



Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
Except, as the likes of those Guardian pieces and the Norman Baker book I mentioned in the other thread show, they are nowhere near as symbolic as they and their apologists claim, so there is a clear harm to our supposedly democratic processes. If they want to act politically, then stand for office like everyone else must.

Most of the supposed traditions are recently made up bolleaux (see Norman Baker again) and are more akin to bread and circuses than anything else.

Why on earth do we need "character" in politics. I'll settle for fairness and effectiveness.

You want to keep them, you are welcome to them. They can afford to pay their own shipping costs...

Last edited by Carrot Flower King; 9th February 2021 at 06:04 AM.
Carrot Flower King is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 07:38 AM   #12
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 18,086
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Quote:
Cons: it costs money.
Actually, it costs a lot less than people think. What people tend to forget is that the Government has access to the income from the Crown Estates, which is about $330 million a year.

They also assume that the Queen and family get paid by the Government, which was true under the deal that allowed the income of the Estates to go to the Government, however, in 2012 this deal ended and now the Royals get 25% of the income of the Estates and are paid nothing from the Government.
Not only that: There is a certain amount of tourist revenue that results from the monarchy.

And another mitigating factor: If the monarchy did not exist, not all of the 'costs' would automatically disappear. Instead, the costs would simply have to be paid from other parts of the government.

For example: Lets say the queen goes on some sort of "goodwill" visit to Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan. If the monarch did not exist, you would likely have to send (taxpayer paid) diplomats to accomplish the same thing. Or in the case of something like "knighthoods"... if it wasn't the queen involved in the ceremony, someone else in the government would have to be paid to do so.

(I am not saying the monarchy is cheaper than those alternatives, just that the costs are partly offset.)
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 12:37 PM   #13
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 18,086
Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King View Post
Quote:
I am Canadian, so we actually share the monarchy with the UK.

I think we (as well as the UK) should keep it.

It is largely symbolic, so it doesn't HARM anything. Plus, I think there is value having a head of state that is above politics. (Imagine receiving some great honor like a knighthood, and having to receive it from Boris Johnson instead of the Queen...)

Also, I think some of the associated traditions (the pomp surrounding the throne speech, the ceremony around dissolving parliament, etc) adds character to politics.
Except, as the likes of those Guardian pieces and the Norman Baker book I mentioned in the other thread show, , they are nowhere near as symbolic as they and their apologists claim, so there is a clear harm to our supposedly democratic processes.
A little hint... If you are trying to put together a convincing argument, pointing people to another thread that might have references that they can then go and search out to read is... not very useful. Either put things in your own words, or at least give a reference with a specific reference to something that supports your point.

As for the "Monarch's Power"... doesn't really exist. Yes, technically she does have certain... authorities. (She really could kill someone if she wanted, and get away with it, for example. Or veto popular legislation.) But, in modern times a monarch is unlikely to do so because doing so would lead to calls to the monarch's removal.

And the monarch can lobby the government, but at the end of the day, it is still the democratically-elected government that makes the decision whether to actually listen to the Queen's opinions.
Quote:
If they want to act politically, then stand for office like everyone else must.
I already gave a reason why having an elected head-of-state can be detrimental. (Of course you ignored the point.)

Do you honestly think the U.S. had "better government" when Trump was president because "gosh gee... their head of state was elected"? Do you honestly think that if Boris Johnson was the "head of state" that somehow the U.K. would see any sort of great improvement (rather than people being even more embarrassed than they currently are)?

Once again... one of the arguments against having an elected head of state (rather than a monarch) is that there are certain functions where it would be preferable to have non-political people involved. Compare a ceremony where a queen confers knighthood on someone (generally a dignified non-political ceremony) with Trump's ceremony honoring the Navaho code talkers (where he started making racist comments). If you were a person who was to be honored, which ceremony would you prefer to attend?
Quote:
Most of the supposed traditions are recently made up bolleaux (see Norman Baker again) and are more akin to bread and circuses than anything else.
Actually many of those traditions go back hundreds of years. Not exactly "recent" in my books.
Quote:
Why on earth do we need "character" in politics.
Why does a country need a national anthem or a flag? They are a waste of time and money. Why do they need museums? People can get all the information they need from books. Why do countries like the United States celebrate the 4th of July when they can just give people an extra day of holiday to use whenever?

These things help give a national identity. And, many people simply like having them.

Its the same with the monarchy and all the traditions that surround it.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 01:23 PM   #14
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,912
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
It is largely symbolic, so it doesn't HARM anything.
I think this idea (that symbolic institutions can't harm anything) is at least a little contentious. We often hear in recent years that "representation matters"--that having young people see people like themselves portrayed in media (and not just in menial or stereotyped positions) is important. It helps crystalize our ideas about what is possible. I'm inclined to agree that this is important, but it's surely symbolic, as well.

One of the nice things about the US is that we can say that (almost) anyone can grow up to be president. Of course, this isn't strictly true, and we might sometimes wish it were otherwise, but it's an important kind of egalitarian symbolism.

In a constitutional monarchy, we're forced to concede that there's a prominent and influential public office (even if it's one that lacks much formal power) that only members of a certain family can hold (at least, as long as they keep pumping out heirs), and that's a detrimental kind of symbolism in a liberal democracy.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 04:36 PM   #15
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
One of the nice things about the US is that we can say that (almost) anyone can grow up to be president. Of course, this isn't strictly true, and we might sometimes wish it were otherwise, but it's an important kind of egalitarian symbolism.
I am firmly of the opinion that wanting to grow up and become President should be the first disqualifying feature on the ability to grow up and become President. I'd rather have a Head of State that was willing to sacrifice of themselves and take on the role to serve the public, than someone that wants the job for power and glory.

This is something that people again tend to forget. Those in the Modern-day Monarchy might have wealthy and privileged lives, to a point, but they are also public servants, on show all the time, unable to lead normal lives outside of the spotlight of public scrutiny, and having their futures decided for them. Personally, you couldn't pay me enough to do the job. Oh, and you don't get to retire either. The Queen is 94 and has been doing the job for 68 years! That means that there are people who were born after she started who have now retired from their work lives, but she can't.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 05:34 PM   #16
RolandRat
Graduate Poster
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,324
It isn't the monarchy that brings in cash. Peeps turn up to see the trappings. The jewels, the palaces and whatnot.

The Crown estates should be turned over to the people, administered by the Government and the royals should be turfed out on their backsides to earn a proper living. Bunch of parasites, each and every one of them.
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 06:47 PM   #17
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,912
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
I am firmly of the opinion that wanting to grow up and become President should be the first disqualifying feature on the ability to grow up and become President.
I don't get the relevance, since my comment went to possibility and not desire.

But if this is the way you feel about it, I can only say that the constitutional monarchies have then got things precisely backwards. They've handed the real power to people who might be seeking power and glory, and the ceremonial power to those who you imagine don't.

Quote:
This is something that people again tend to forget. Those in the Modern-day Monarchy might have wealthy and privileged lives, to a point, but they are also public servants, on show all the time, unable to lead normal lives outside of the spotlight of public scrutiny, and having their futures decided for them.
Historically the whole of the British aristocracy was raised with a sense of noblesse oblige; the idea that this produces better results...well, we've run that experiment.

Quote:
The Queen is 94 and has been doing the job for 68 years! That means that there are people who were born after she started who have now retired from their work lives, but she can't.
Go out and trim the hedge and you've worked harder than the Queen has on any given day.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 08:14 PM   #18
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
But if this is the way you feel about it, I can only say that the constitutional monarchies have then got things precisely backwards. They've handed the real power to people who might be seeking power and glory, and the ceremonial power to those who you imagine don't.
Oh, I feel that way about anyone that wants to be a politician.

Quote:
Go out and trim the hedge and you've worked harder than the Queen has on any given day.
I'd love to see you keep up this schedule at 90. It might not be physical work, but that doesn't make it any less hard or draining, just ask office workers.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 08:15 PM   #19
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
It isn't the monarchy that brings in cash. Peeps turn up to see the trappings. The jewels, the palaces and whatnot.

The Crown estates should be turned over to the people, administered by the Government and the royals should be turfed out on their backsides to earn a proper living. Bunch of parasites, each and every one of them.
So you are advocating stealing their property and then tossing them on the poor heap because.....
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 08:22 PM   #20
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,912
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Oh, I feel that way about anyone that wants to be a politician.
Then it's strictly irrelevant as a defense of constitutional monarchy.

Quote:
I'd love to see you keep up this schedule at 90. It might not be physical work, but that doesn't make it any less hard or draining, just ask office workers.
It's neither physical work nor office work. She has the same ******* job as the animatronic bear at Chuck E. Cheese. Wave, make idle chit-chat without understanding what is being said, and get people unaccountably excited about meeting her.

She can't retire because she's already retired, and always has been. None of their schedules are demanding in the least.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 09:17 PM   #21
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 29,876
Bunch of over-privileged, inbred, under-performing, outright corrupt*, pedophile, bigoted pricks.

I'd vote to drop them any time our government showed the balls to ask.


*
1
2
3
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 10:13 PM   #22
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 15,705
the advantage Monarchy shares with Democracy is that, in theory, it allows for a peaceful transition of power.

It is hard to overstate how important that is.
__________________
“You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.”
-Anne Lamott
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 12:42 AM   #23
SusanB-M1
Incurable Optimist
 
SusanB-M1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,766
Originally Posted by Airfix View Post
Pros / cons ?

Should we hold a referendum on scrapping it?
Definitely not. Unless all participants can show they have a detailed knowledge of its history.
Quote:
How would you vote if we did ?
I would vote to retain it because it is something that isn't broke and doesn't need fixing unless a far, far better alternative is ready to take its place.

Having now read all the posts, I would like to see those so anti-monarchy provide a detailed programme of how all the things they dislike could be done or provided better, more traditionally, more colourfully, etc.
Also, ask anyone living an ordinary, non-royal life, whether they would like to be the monarch and the answer every time will be no, because most of us prefer aour level of anonymity.

Last edited by SusanB-M1; 10th February 2021 at 12:59 AM.
SusanB-M1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 03:05 AM   #24
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pontnewynydd, Wales
Posts: 26,921
Originally Posted by SusanB-M1 View Post
Definitely not. Unless all participants can show they have a detailed knowledge of its history.

I would vote to retain it because it is something that isn't broke and doesn't need fixing unless a far, far better alternative is ready to take its place.

Having now read all the posts, I would like to see those so anti-monarchy provide a detailed programme of how all the things they dislike could be done or provided better, more traditionally, more colourfully, etc.
Also, ask anyone living an ordinary, non-royal life, whether they would like to be the monarch and the answer every time will be no, because most of us prefer aour level of anonymity.
All of which is based on the assumption that we need a monarchy, or something like it, in the first place. Can you justify that assumption?
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 03:18 AM   #25
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,408
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
It isn't the monarchy that brings in cash. Peeps turn up to see the trappings. The jewels, the palaces and whatnot.

The Crown estates should be turned over to the people, administered by the Government and the royals should be turfed out on their backsides to earn a proper living. Bunch of parasites, each and every one of them.
I've read that Versailles is the biggest single tourist destination in Europe.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 03:26 AM   #26
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 23,938
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
It isn't the monarchy that brings in cash. Peeps turn up to see the trappings. The jewels, the palaces and whatnot.

The Crown estates should be turned over to the people, administered by the Government and the royals should be turfed out on their backsides to earn a proper living. Bunch of parasites, each and every one of them.
Good old British envy is alive and well! If it isn't the wealth of the Royals we are jealous of it'll be the President of the Republic swanning around in a private Air Force One and a fleet of about two hundred armoured vehicles.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 03:27 AM   #27
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 23,938
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Bunch of over-privileged, inbred, under-performing, outright corrupt*, pedophile, bigoted pricks.

I'd vote to drop them any time our government showed the balls to ask.


*
1
2
3
Nice.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 03:29 AM   #28
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
It's neither physical work nor office work. She has the same ******* job as the animatronic bear at Chuck E. Cheese. Wave, make idle chit-chat without understanding what is being said, and get people unaccountably excited about meeting her.

She can't retire because she's already retired, and always has been. None of their schedules are demanding in the least.
You clearly didn't bother to look at the link I provided, but I guess facts don't matter when your mind is already closed.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 04:42 AM   #29
SusanB-M1
Incurable Optimist
 
SusanB-M1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,766
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
All of which is based on the assumption that we need a monarchy, or something like it, in the first place. Can you justify that assumption?
From an evolutionary point of view, in animal groups a leader has benefited (wel, mostly!) the species survival and success , but the form of that leadership has as many titles and positions as there are groups to think of them. So, yes, I think that an assumption of the requirement of a leader can be made.
SusanB-M1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 05:11 AM   #30
Airfix
Graduate Poster
 
Airfix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,047
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
All of which is based on the assumption that we need a monarchy, or something like it, in the first place. Can you justify that assumption?
Well said, I can't justify the idea.
Airfix is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 05:23 AM   #31
Ethan Thane Athen
Master Poster
 
Ethan Thane Athen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,329
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Not only that: There is a certain amount of tourist revenue that results from the monarchy.

And another mitigating factor: If the monarchy did not exist, not all of the 'costs' would automatically disappear. Instead, the costs would simply have to be paid from other parts of the government.

For example: Lets say the queen goes on some sort of "goodwill" visit to Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan. If the monarch did not exist, you would likely have to send (taxpayer paid) diplomats to accomplish the same thing. Or in the case of something like "knighthoods"... if it wasn't the queen involved in the ceremony, someone else in the government would have to be paid to do so.

(I am not saying the monarchy is cheaper than those alternatives, just that the costs are partly offset.)
Re tourist revenue - that's relatively rarely to actually see the Queen though, more to see the buildings etc, which would remain. Indeed they could be opened up more.

Re the goodwill visits etc, er yes, that should be done by representatives of the people, not an unelected head of state whose ancestors just happened to be more successful in the 'taking by force' of yesteryear. Would probably be cheaper and more productive as well - we certainly wouldn't need a Royal bloody Yacht!

As for knighthoods, er, why on earth would you have them?
Ethan Thane Athen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 05:27 AM   #32
Ethan Thane Athen
Master Poster
 
Ethan Thane Athen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,329
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
I am firmly of the opinion that wanting to grow up and become President should be the first disqualifying feature on the ability to grow up and become President. I'd rather have a Head of State that was willing to sacrifice of themselves and take on the role to serve the public, than someone that wants the job for power and glory.

This is something that people again tend to forget. Those in the Modern-day Monarchy might have wealthy and privileged lives, to a point, but they are also public servants, on show all the time, unable to lead normal lives outside of the spotlight of public scrutiny, and having their futures decided for them. Personally, you couldn't pay me enough to do the job. Oh, and you don't get to retire either. The Queen is 94 and has been doing the job for 68 years! That means that there are people who were born after she started who have now retired from their work lives, but she can't.
Bolding mine - er that is completely and utterly her choice (helped in no small measure, allegedly, by her knowledge of the dickhead who would replace her because there is no 'fitness for purpose' test when it comes to royalty).
Ethan Thane Athen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 05:35 AM   #33
Carrot Flower King
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 1,573
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
A little hint... If you are trying to put together a convincing argument, pointing people to another thread that might have references that they can then go and search out to read is... not very useful. Either put things in your own words, or at least give a reference with a specific reference to something that supports your point.

As for the "Monarch's Power"... doesn't really exist. Yes, technically she does have certain... authorities. (She really could kill someone if she wanted, and get away with it, for example. Or veto popular legislation.) But, in modern times a monarch is unlikely to do so because doing so would lead to calls to the monarch's removal.

And the monarch can lobby the government, but at the end of the day, it is still the democratically-elected government that makes the decision whether to actually listen to the Queen's opinions.

I already gave a reason why having an elected head-of-state can be detrimental. (Of course you ignored the point.)

Do you honestly think the U.S. had "better government" when Trump was president because "gosh gee... their head of state was elected"? Do you honestly think that if Boris Johnson was the "head of state" that somehow the U.K. would see any sort of great improvement (rather than people being even more embarrassed than they currently are)?

Once again... one of the arguments against having an elected head of state (rather than a monarch) is that there are certain functions where it would be preferable to have non-political people involved. Compare a ceremony where a queen confers knighthood on someone (generally a dignified non-political ceremony) with Trump's ceremony honoring the Navaho code talkers (where he started making racist comments). If you were a person who was to be honored, which ceremony would you prefer to attend?

Actually many of those traditions go back hundreds of years. Not exactly "recent" in my books.

Why does a country need a national anthem or a flag? They are a waste of time and money. Why do they need museums? People can get all the information they need from books. Why do countries like the United States celebrate the 4th of July when they can just give people an extra day of holiday to use whenever?

These things help give a national identity. And, many people simply like having them.

Its the same with the monarchy and all the traditions that surround it.
It's in the UK politics thread, of which this theread is a spin off - I didn't think I needed to specify as that is pretty obvious. Anyway, the book was Norman Baker's "...And What Do You Do?" and here - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ng-their-homes - is a link to one of the Guardian pieces, which has links to others in the series.

Standing for elected office - why on earth do you think I'm equating that with anything to do with Trump or the US at all? We're talking about UK-ian monarchy and I'm in the UK. Elected office here being a member of Parliament, a councillor or similar; we don't have elected presidents or anything similar.

Also, why a head of state at all (as I keep asking), as those "functions" you mention could be perfomed by anyone. And in the unlikely event that I was put forward for nay honour (services to nursing? Services to annoying NHS managment? Services to glaring over my glasses? Services to my cats? Services to sarcasm?) I would refuse, as that whole system should go. I did not ignore your point about elected heads of state being "detrimental", as it's not relevant to a discussion of our monarchy and only comes into play when your head of state is also your head of government, which ours isn't.

"National identity", well, we'll just have to disagree on that one: I think it's an over-rated thing; and I do not wish to have monarchy and aristocracy nor any of the associated flummery as any part of my identity, rather the Chartists, the Tolpuddle Martytrs, the Diggers and others.
Carrot Flower King is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 05:39 AM   #34
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 100,023
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
…snip..

This is something that people again tend to forget. Those in the Modern-day Monarchy might have wealthy and privileged lives, to a point, but they are also public servants, on show all the time, unable to lead normal lives outside of the spotlight of public scrutiny, and having their futures decided for them. Personally, you couldn't pay me enough to do the job. Oh, and you don't get to retire either. The Queen is 94 and has been doing the job for 68 years! That means that there are people who were born after she started who have now retired from their work lives, but she can't.
Go through the queen’s history and what do you find, time and time again her state visits and her interests coincide. She has always done what she wants when she wanted. With literally months “off” every year - and no that’s not recent because she is old, that is what she has always done.

Look at her “historic” trip to Dublin, just so happens she could fit in almost a whole day visiting the national stud…

She also could have retired at any time, no one can force her to remain the monarch, she does so because she wants to.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 05:43 AM   #35
RolandRat
Graduate Poster
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,324
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
So you are advocating stealing their property and then tossing them on the poor heap because.....
Stealing their property? No, I'm advocating taking it back.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Good old British envy is alive and well! If it isn't the wealth of the Royals we are jealous of it'll be the President of the Republic swanning around in a private Air Force One and a fleet of about two hundred armoured vehicles.
Nothing to do with envy. They are an anachronism. They do nothing to justify the money that is spent on them.

https://www.statista.com/chart/18569...nancial%20year.

Turf them out and the cash raised by the holdings that they originally stole can go to benefitting the country directly.
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 05:45 AM   #36
Ethan Thane Athen
Master Poster
 
Ethan Thane Athen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,329
Originally Posted by SusanB-M1 View Post
Definitely not. Unless all participants can show they have a detailed knowledge of its history.

I would vote to retain it because it is something that isn't broke and doesn't need fixing unless a far, far better alternative is ready to take its place.

Having now read all the posts, I would like to see those so anti-monarchy provide a detailed programme of how all the things they dislike could be done or provided better, more traditionally, more colourfully, etc.
Also, ask anyone living an ordinary, non-royal life, whether they would like to be the monarch and the answer every time will be no, because most of us prefer aour level of anonymity.
I think the argument is most of those things don't need doing and I certainly don't see any anti-royalists saying they should be done 'more traditionally or more colourfully'. Quite the reverse in my opinion.

I think your final premise is unsupported. I agree I probably wouldn't want to do it as I enjoy my current life. Similarly I wouldn't particularly seek celebrity / fame and fortune but that's just me. There is ample evidence (just look at reality TV and the glut of z list celebrities etc) that there are many people who will do anything for celebrity so I really don't think you'd have a shortage of volunteers. As I say though, I'm unconvinced there's anything that needs doing. Other democracies function perfectly well (as well as democracies do anyway) without a monarchy.

I will admit, in weakening my case, that I haven't exhaustively researched every last duty (I don't care enough and the fact other countries manage without suggest it's all surmountable) but even those that some deem so important (transition of power etc) seem largely symbolic. As has been said, the Queen dare not actually exercise that power as she'd be out on her arse, so they seem pointless and, if needed, better done by someone who would be willing to exercise them if necessary.

I do have respect for the current monarch, I think she's done well at the job she's expected to do and carried it out with diligence and dignity. That is purely luck and no indicator of the performance of future monarchs. Furthermore, with reference to her age / workload, I met her several years ago and, even then I would have assessed her as incapable of holding down any normal job and long past the point she should have retired.
Ethan Thane Athen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 05:45 AM   #37
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 100,023
Originally Posted by Ethan Thane Athen View Post
Re tourist revenue - that's relatively rarely to actually see the Queen though, more to see the buildings etc, which would remain. Indeed they could be opened up more.

Re the goodwill visits etc, er yes, that should be done by representatives of the people, not an unelected head of state whose ancestors just happened to be more successful in the 'taking by force' of yesteryear. Would probably be cheaper and more productive as well - we certainly wouldn't need a Royal bloody Yacht!

As for knighthoods, er, why on earth would you have them?
That’s always the old chestnut that is pulled out - without the monarchy we could really up tourism. The French don’t do bad with the Palace of Versailles and they got rid of their monarchy over 200 years ago.

Imagine opening up Windsor* castle - it’s already really popular but imagine tourists having full access 365 days a year.


*People will say “oh she personally owns it” - yeah well tough, compulsory purchase it and give the monarch half a million.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 05:46 AM   #38
RolandRat
Graduate Poster
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,324
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Oh, I feel that way about anyone that wants to be a politician.



I'd love to see you keep up this schedule at 90. It might not be physical work, but that doesn't make it any less hard or draining, just ask office workers.
That link, just oh my. That's her "work"..
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 06:13 AM   #39
Airfix
Graduate Poster
 
Airfix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,047
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
That’s always the old chestnut that is pulled out - without the monarchy we could really up tourism. The French don’t do bad with the Palace of Versailles and they got rid of their monarchy over 200 years ago.

Imagine opening up Windsor* castle - it’s already really popular but imagine tourists having full access 365 days a year.


*People will say “oh she personally owns it” - yeah well tough, compulsory purchase it and give the monarch half a million.
She's loaded, she would still be well off if it were compulsory purchased for £1.
Airfix is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 06:14 AM   #40
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 23,938
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
That’s always the old chestnut that is pulled out - without the monarchy we could really up tourism. The French don’t do bad with the Palace of Versailles and they got rid of their monarchy over 200 years ago.

Imagine opening up Windsor* castle - it’s already really popular but imagine tourists having full access 365 days a year.


*People will say “oh she personally owns it” - yeah well tough, compulsory purchase it and give the monarch half a million.
Do we really want to be like the French, with alternate Socialist and Fascist presidents?

Or the Russians, who also executed their royal family?
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:36 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.