joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:27 am

Anyone seen the front cover of today's (Friday) Independent?

With all the hype of the Queen's 80th today all over the media and the papers, the left-wing Independent has chosen to place a massive photo of the king of Nepal on the front page, in full royal dress, standing in front of his throne. Page 2 is entirely covered with the story.

I think this is great. The crisis there is far more important than the 80th birthday of a monarch that is increasinly out of place in today's society. Would they have displayed this blatant royal-looking photo on the front page if it hadn't been the Queen's birthday today? Someone in the office even thought it was the Queen from a glance at a distance.

There is a short paragraph in the middle of the paper on her birthday.

http://www.independent.co.uk

[Edit: Add link]

[Edited 2006-04-21 17:34:09]
 
BMIFlyer
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:39 am

Quoting Joshdean (Thread starter):
a monarch that is increasinly out of place in today's society.

Exactly why HM Queen Elizabeth out of place?

Is HM Queen Margrethe II of Denmark out of place?

How about HM Queen Beatrix of Holland?


Please explain....


Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:47 am

In 2006 I am astounded that we still have the Queen as our head of State and fork out millions of pounds (50p for every man, woman and child in this country per year = £30m) of hard earned taxpayers money on her and her family that I believe could be better spent elsewhere. In my mind ‘the royals’ have little regard for the ordinary people of this country, and are in fact an embarrassment in terms of their behaviours and attitudes. Unjustified and unearned extravagence are becoming harder to get away with in this 21st century 1st world society. Especially when much of it is so blatantly at the expense of the tax paying public. There is simply no place for it. People wise up and start to question this kind of thing as time goes on.

[Edit: the year  Smile]

[Edited 2006-04-21 17:50:51]
 
cosec59
Posts: 2618
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:59 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:54 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 2):
There is simply no place for it.

There is every place for it.

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 2):
hard earned taxpayers money on her

 Yeah sure

The Royal family attract the tourists and therefore extra income.

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 2):
Especially when much of it is so blatantly at the expense of the tax paying public

The Queen pays income tax too.

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 2):
People wise up and start to question this kind of thing as time goes on.

Some people. Usually Independant readers. Those that are totally out of touch with reality
Rules are for the obedience of fools but for the guidance of wise men
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:56 am

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 1):
Exactly why HM Queen Elizabeth out of place?

Indeed. People seem to be under the impression that the monarchy has had one long glorious history of unquestioned devotion, and that only the last 15 years has seen even the remotest questioning. Utter nonsense of course.

Leaving aside the fact that we did have a Republic at one point having executed the king, the Victorian period saw vicious, scatalogical attacks on the monarchy without any parallel today from pamphleteers, cartoonists and the mainstream press. For much of her reign, Victoria was loathed. With the dissolution of the Empire there was again lots of debate about ending the monarchy.

In fact, with the exception of the brief period post the death of Diana, the monarchy has rarely been stronger in this country. It exists because people like it and want it. The number of republicans in Britain as a percentage is almost certainly lower than it has been at virtually any time over the last 300 years - simply because historically it's so unusual for it to be such an utter non issue. It isn't a hugely positive adoration of the monarchy; it's a quiet contentment with the status quo, and a strong feeling that anything else would be worse.

It exists because people are happy with it. And that's it, really. The Independent are just trying to be contrary. Nothing wrong with, it's a valuable role to play, but I wouldn't pay it any more attention than that.

[Edited 2006-04-21 18:27:02]
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
Matt72033
Posts: 1589
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 10:03 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:56 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 2):
In 2006 I am astounded that we still have the Queen as our head of State and fork out millions of pounds (50p for every man, woman and child in this country per year = £30m

yeah, i mean i really miss that 50p a year  Yeah sure

Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 3):
The Queen pays income tax too

whats her income? our tax? does she pay tax on our tax? lol
 
cosec59
Posts: 2618
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:59 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:01 am

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 5):
whats her income? our tax? does she pay tax on our tax? lol

Much of the Queen's private income comes from the Duchy of Lancaster - an estate comprising more than 19,000 hectares of land, which made the Queen £7.3m before tax in 2000-01.
Rules are for the obedience of fools but for the guidance of wise men
 
joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:05 am

Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 3):
The Royal family attract the tourists and therefore extra income.

The argument that they bring in significant revenue in tourism is no reason to keep them. We're not a tourist attraction, we're a democracy. Ask those given a poor education, living in a deprived area if they think it's justified £30,000,000 can be spent on one family, when the goverment won't fund the regeneration of their area. I would like to see the monarchy done away with altogether, at least downgraded. Abolish the civil list tomorrow, let the country and the people take back the ‘acquired’ land and wealth from the Windsor’s and extended family.

Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 3):
The Queen pays income tax too.

She may pay income tax but this is in fact mimimal compared with an individual who would have a similar income. Add the £30m or so the royals TAKE from the tax payer, and it net terms they pay nothing.

Quoting Joshdean (Thread starter):
Some people. Usually Independant readers. Those that are totally out of touch with reality

I see no justification for this last comment, so please explain.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:07 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 2):
People wise up and start to question this kind of thing as time goes on.

You seem to be existing in a bubble of only recognising the last decade or so. Perhaps you should read a little history on the subject before commenting.

It's not that you're necessarily wrong in wishing for abolition, but your reasons for desiring it are flawed. Perhaps you should seek some guidance from Qantasforever on the subject. Whilst his own views pertain to Australia rather than Britain, his wishes for the removal of the monarchy are at least logical and well-argued, and thus form a better platform for debate than those you have listed above.

[Edited 2006-04-21 18:18:40]
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:14 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 7):
We're not a tourist attraction, we're a democracy.

Oh good. Since approval for the monarchy runs at over 80%, which is virtual unanimity in a pluralistic society, I presume you fully accept that your view carries very little weight in society as a whole?
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
skidmarks
Posts: 6614
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:51 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:20 am

It would appear Josh that you have an axe to grind regarding the Royal Family. Something that the Independant panders to. However, you may be somewhat upset to learn that not everyone has your point of view.

I have heard this arguement so many times from some people who all have aspirations for the UK to become a Republic. If the bulk of the UK wanted a republic, then I feel sure that there would have been one by now. Which means that perhaps the bulk of the UK doesnt share your dislike and apparent loathing for them. Which puts you a bit out on a limb.

However, since this is a Democracy, you are entitled to your opinion as much as I am along with everyone else on these forums. Just don't expect all of us to agree with you. Because I for one don't.

I frankly couldn't care less how much they cost us in hard cash. I am perfectly happy with them where they are. They are infinitely more preferable than an "elected" President who is here today and gone tomorrow - with probably more cash than the Royals use in a lifetime.

And your rather blase statement about tourism doesnt wash. Tell that to the millions of tourists who come across to London in the hope of glimpsing one of the Royals or even the Queen, spending their cash here. Even you must be able to see that a considerable bulk of the country's income relies on tourism. Whatever YOU may think, they are an asset to this country and work a damn sight harder than either you or I do.

Andy  old 
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
 
bristolflyer
Posts: 2103
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 1:35 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:33 am

Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 3):
There is every place for it.

 checkmark 

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 7):
The argument that they bring in significant revenue in tourism is no reason to keep them. We're not a tourist attraction

Is serves every economy well to attract tourists to the country. I used be cynical as to the role of the monarchy, but now I've grown up and I've seen what they do, I support them.

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 2):
In my mind ‘the royals’ have little regard for the ordinary people of this country,

I guess the 'in my mind' comment is the get-out clause for a blatant disregard of the truth. Unless of course you don't know the truth. Do you know how much work they do for charity (not just the Queen, ALL of them)? Have you heard of the Prince's Trust, for example? I have seen at first hand how much work they do to help the less fortunate, the impoverished etc etc. Can you remember seeing Princess Diana championing Aids causes? And land mine issues?

And then there's the intangible. Don't you have a sense of nationalistic pride that we have a royal family? Remember the Jubilee celebrations when a million people lined the streets of Pall Mall? 50p seems like a good deal to belong to a country that has those sort of things going on.

BF
Fortune favours the brave
 
joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:38 am

Quoting Banco (Reply 8):
You seem to be existing in a bubble of only recognising the last decade or so

Sorry, I missed the point where I mentioned it only being the last decade or so. Could you point it out?

Quoting Banco (Reply 8):
Perhaps you should read a little history on the subject before commenting.

If I were to 'read a little history' before commenting on everything throughout the day I would have no time to do anything. Nothing I have said is factually wrong and would have benefited from 'reading a little history' beforehand.

Quoting Banco (Reply 8):
but your reasons for desiring it are flawed

I 'desire' it because of the financial, moral and democartic reasons. What people desire is not always straightfroward and acheivable. Which part of what I have said is flawed?

Quoting Banco (Reply 8):
Whislt his own views pertain to Australia rather than Britain, his wish for the removal of the monarchy are at least logical and well-argued, and thus form a better platform for debate than those you have listed above.

Well what are those arguments then? There's no point saying somebody else has a better argument, then not saying what it is. That's hardly a 'better platfrom for debate'.

Anyway, platforms for debate aside, it's Friday evening so I'm going to drink so beer  bouncy 
 
joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:46 am

Quoting Banco (Reply 9):
Oh good. Since approval for the monarchy runs at over 80%, which is virtual unanimity in a pluralistic society, I presume you fully accept that your view carries very little weight in society as a whole?

Of course I fully accept that. I have the view that Dire Straits prodcuce good music, although generally this is perceived not to be the case by most people. I still believe it and know that it has very little weight within music circles. But that's what an opinion is Banco. If all my opoionis were in line with what everybody else thinks and all the approval rating polls, I would be one hell of a boring person. I would probably be stuck at home reading up on a little history before I thought about making a comment on Saddam.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:50 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 12):
Sorry, I missed the point where I mentioned it only being the last decade or so. Could you point it out?

I quoted the relevant section before I said that. Try re-reading.

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 12):
If I were to 'read a little history' before commenting on everything throughout the day I would have no time to do anything.

I think that's worthy of standing alone without further comment.  Yeah sure

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 12):
Nothing I have said is factually wrong and would have benefited from 'reading a little history' beforehand.

Er, yes, quite a lot of it was. Try even reading what others have said.

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 12):
I 'desire' it because of the financial, moral and democartic reasons. What people desire is not always straightfroward and acheivable. Which part of what I have said is flawed?

Financial: That's just wrong. Any basic costing of a presidential system on a net basis suggests it is likely to cost more. It's been done. Research it.

Moral: Who made you God?

Democratic: The vast, VAST majority prefer the status quo. Democratically, you are so far wrong as to be not worth bothering with. Why is that people in the minority seem to feel that "democracy" doesn't apply to them?

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 12):
Well what are those arguments then? There's no point saying somebody else has a better argument, then not saying what it is. That's hardly a 'better platfrom for debate'.

It's not my place to speak for QFF. If you really want to know, do a search on his user name and ask him to send over his document on an Australian Republican system. It's interesting reading, whether you agree with him or not. And I'm not going to say any more because it's getting dangerously close to offering him praise, and I much prefer slagging him off. Big grin

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 12):
it's Friday evening so I'm going to drink so beer

Have one for the Queen, then.  Wink
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:55 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 13):
Quoting Banco (Reply 9):
Oh good. Since approval for the monarchy runs at over 80%, which is virtual unanimity in a pluralistic society, I presume you fully accept that your view carries very little weight in society as a whole?

Of course I fully accept that.

And then:

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 12):
I 'desire' it because of [...] democratic reasons.

Hmmm.  scratchchin 
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:55 am

Quoting Skidmarks (Reply 10):
you may be somewhat upset to learn that not everyone has your point of view

I am not at all upset that not everyone has my point of view, hence raising the subject in this forum. If I believed my opinion to be the only solution, regardless of what anyone else says, I wouldn't have posted this topic. The whole point of posting a topic is to invite comment in opinion.

Quoting Skidmarks (Reply 10):
I frankly couldn't care less how much they cost us in hard cash.

I agree, but it's the principle more than the cash that is the reason for my view on this.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:12 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 16):
I agree, but it's the principle more than the cash that is the reason for my view on this.

You've lost me there. What principle? Any Head of State is going to cost a fortune, so what are you getting at?  Confused
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:16 am

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
I quoted the relevant section before I said that. Try re-reading.

Sorry, re-read, can't see the bit about the decade 'or so'. Perhaps you were referring to this bit though:

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 2):
Unjustified and unearned extravagence are becoming harder to get away with in this 21st century 1st world society. Especially when much of it is so blatantly at the expense of the tax paying public. There is simply no place for it. People wise up and start to question this kind of thing as time goes on.

I take it you've seen the mess that's kicked off over the cost of Cheri Booth's hairstylest throught Labour's last election campaign, it's this kind of thing that I'm referring too, along with the cost of fuel Bush uses for his entourage whenever going anywhere etc. My point here is that with the rise of the media, the liberalisation of society and encouragement (and ability to get away with) more daring free speech, this can process can only be accelerated. Okay if it happens in 2,000 years time, we're still getting closer to that time at a quicker pace.

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
I think that's worthy of standing alone without further comment

Excellent  Smile

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
Er, yes, quite a lot of it was.

Opionions aside (as I think we've all made it clear there is no right or wrong opionion), which facts did I get wrong?

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
Financial: That's just wrong. Any basic costing of a presidential system on a net basis suggests it is likely to cost more. It's been done. Research it.

Now that is simply not true.

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
Moral: Who made you God?

I think that should be god with a small 'g'  Wink

Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
Why is that people in the minority seem to feel that "democracy" doesn't apply to them?

I may be in the minority in this instance, but I certainly don't feel that excludes me from the democracy of this society.
 
joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:18 am

Quoting BristolFlyer (Reply 11):
Don't you have a sense of nationalistic pride

Sorry, none. If anything I have sense of nationalistic shame for a whole host of reasons for which I'll save the details for another time. Iraq is the major one. At the other end of the spectrum, theres the way the (minority) of football fans behave when abroad.
 
joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:20 am

Quoting Banco (Reply 17):
What principle?

The fact that they take £30,000,000 from the public and too much of it goes on massively OTT purchases!
 
joshdean
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:41 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:22 am

I really am going for beer now. I finished work an hour ago and I'm still sat at my desk, which is not good for a Friday. Evening all  wave 
 
cosec59
Posts: 2618
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:59 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:23 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 21):
I really am going for beer now

The Queen's Arms by any chance?  Big grin
Rules are for the obedience of fools but for the guidance of wise men
 
bristolflyer
Posts: 2103
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 1:35 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:28 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 19):
Sorry, none. If anything I have sense of nationalistic shame for a whole host of reasons for which I'll save the details for another time. Iraq is the major one. At the other end of the spectrum, theres the way the (minority) of football fans behave when abroad.

I agree there are a few things to be less than proud of - nothing is ever perfect. But really, those things are minor compared to the great things that the UK offers. The UK has great people, history, cutlure, heritage, beautiful scenery... I could go on. It's when you go to other countries you begin to realise just how great Britain really is.

Put aside your woes about a couple of hundred football hooligans and celebrate the fact that you live with tens of millions of great people.

http://www.concordesst.com/pictures/flypast/flypast5.jpg

Rule Britannia!

BF

[Edited 2006-04-21 19:32:05]
Fortune favours the brave
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:32 am

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 18):
I take it you've seen the mess that's kicked off over the cost of Cheri Booth's hairstylest throught Labour's last election campaign, it's this kind of thing that I'm referring too, along with the cost of fuel Bush uses for his entourage whenever going anywhere etc. My point here is that with the rise of the media, the liberalisation of society and encouragement (and ability to get away with) more daring free speech, this can process can only be accelerated. Okay if it happens in 2,000 years time, we're still getting closer to that time at a quicker pace.

Firstly, the whole Cherie Blair thing was at the cost of the Labour Party, not the public purse. So it's irrelevant.

Secondly, the example of Bush is precisely the point others are making about the cost of any Head of State.

Finally, the point about "in 2,000 year's time" is nonsensical. you could advance an argument for Communism in the same way.

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 18):
which facts did I get wrong?

Read people's comments.

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 18):
Quoting Banco (Reply 14):
Financial: That's just wrong. Any basic costing of a presidential system on a net basis suggests it is likely to cost more. It's been done. Research it.

Now that is simply not true.

You'll have to do better than that. What you are doing is including the cost of all castles, estates and palaces in the ledger for the cost of the Royal Family. You can't do that. These things will continue to cost exactly the same irrespective of what political system operates. What are you proposing? The demolition of Buckingham Palace and Balmoral? These things will still have to be paid for, and including them in the cost of the monarchy is plain wrong.

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 18):
I may be in the minority in this instance, but I certainly don't feel that excludes me from the democracy of this society.

You have said several times now that you want the monarhy abolished for "democratic" reasons. Given that the overwhelming majority want the monarchy, are you going to retract that?

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 20):
The fact that they take £30,000,000 from the public

As above, that's an outright lie. You are including the cost of huge numbers of things that will have to be paid for anyway.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
skidmarks
Posts: 6614
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:51 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 3:47 am

Well, obviously debate only happens while the pubs are shut Big grin

Quoting Joshdean (Reply 19):
Sorry, none. If anything I have sense of nationalistic shame for a whole host of reasons for which I'll save the details for another time. Iraq is the major one. At the other end of the spectrum, theres the way the (minority) of football fans behave when abroad.

It's really quite sad, that you have pride in your nationality, especially for the reasons quoted. It is a pity you couldn't be bothered to think of anything you might be proud of, such as the ability to state your views without fear of repression. The UK may have quite a lot wrong with it, and there is no denying that, but there is also quite a lot to be proud of. It just takes a bit of common sense to realise that.

Andy  old 
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4051
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 4:38 am

I don't want to barge in on a discussion between British people but

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 5):
yeah, i mean i really miss that 50p a year

you seem to be missing the whole point of why even a parliamentary monarchy is completely undemocratic.

If you don't mind that, then why am I not entitled to 50 p from every British citizen as well? I sure wouldn't mind that.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
BHXFAOTIPYYC
Posts: 1442
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:47 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 4:46 am

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 26):
f you don't mind that, then why am I not entitled to 50 p from every British citizen as well? I sure wouldn't mind that.

You got a lot more than that from Britain via EU funds I guarantee.

I used to enjoy reading The Independent, but I gave up when it took a distinct turn to the left, so now I only stick to reliable papers like The Sun for my British news!!
Breakfast in BHX, lunch in FAO, dinner in TIP, baggage in YYC.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 6:35 am

I don't think the increasingly-bizarre Indepenent (related to their more obvious Lib Dem affiliation?) really represents the majority view, or even the majority view of republicans in the UK (though maybe not those of certain 'lobbyist' Australians).

Today's G2 in the Guardian had an excellent article on the Queen and the monarchy in general.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/monarchy/story/0,,1757958,00.html

I think it represents the views of 'closet republicans' much more accurately than the sensationalist Independent. The point is makes about the name 'King Charles III' shocking many republicans into life is a valid one, I think. The same motherly feelings displayed to the Queen simply won't be shown to Charles. With his rather timid nature and the animosity displayed by the media to him (Diana?), I think support for the monarchy will really suffer when he takes the throne.

The Independent is increasingly turning into a tabloid. At first, the bold and distinctive front pages were refreshing and interesting. Now, the thrice-weekly climatic apocalypse warnings based on Greenpeace science, along with patronising, supercillious headlings on the 'racism sweeping the UK' or we should all accept EU rule as read makes it more of an alternative-Sun than a quality paper.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:23 am

WOW

This is what happens when you live on the other side of the world and you sleep through european daylight hours.

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 1):
Is HM Queen Margrethe II of Denmark out of place?

The Queen of Denmark is in many respects a genius. An utterly brilliant woman for whom I have great respect.

Quoting Banco (Reply 4):
It exists because people like it and want it.

Yes that is true. It's also true that it exists because the Royal family are adept at self preservation.

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 5):
yeah, i mean i really miss that 50p a year

I think someone quoted a figure of 30million pounds a year before. Even if you spend ten million on a President - if you give a million pounds to twenty hospitals around Britain, I promise you it would make a huge difference. There are many effective ways that the money could be spend.

Quoting Skidmarks (Reply 10):
It would appear Josh that you have an axe to grind regarding the Royal Family.

I disagree - I just think that he isn't satisfied with the current arrangements and wishes to see Britain establish a system of government that is more consistent with his democratic beliefs. The truth is, many people of the younger generation aren't awed by a sense of history and tradition - and would rather seek out best practice than remain loyal to ancient and occasionally antiquated institutions.

I would urge Joshdean to contact the British Republican Campaign, found here: http://www.republic.org.uk/. They present a very solid position, and it's a great resource for discussion.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 28):
(though maybe not those of certain 'lobbyist' Australians).

Don't sensationalise and distort my opinions, please. I don't do it to you. I also ask that you have a little more respect for my profession.

QFF
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:12 am

Quoting QANTASFOREVER (Reply 29):

Don't sensationalise and distort my opinions, please. I don't do it to you. I also ask that you have a little more respect for my profession.

I don't have any respect for your profession, sorry. As for your opinions, is it not true that you don't agree with the Independent's opinion?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:44 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 30):
I don't have any respect for your profession, sorry.

May I ask why?

Well may you not respect what I do, but that is no cause for you to publicly disrespect it.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 30):
As for your opinions, is it not true that you don't agree with the Independent's opinion?

I think it's sensationalised and obviously provocative. They're trying to draw a comparison between the Queen and King Gyandendra - and I don't know if that is entirely fair given the completely different situations in the UK and Nepal. I think it is important that some time is devoted to questioning the institution of the Monarchy. What's happening in Nepal is important and deserves to be reported. If anything, surely the contrast between the two monarchs makes QE2 appear aloof, judicial, a democrat, and a symbol of benevolent stability?

The Independent is representing an alternative view with the full knowledge that most other newspapers will be leading with the Royal birthday.

What is the nature of your disagreement?

QFF
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:46 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 28):
Today's G2 in the Guardian had an excellent article on the Queen and the monarchy in general.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/monarchy/s....html

Just a further note to (gasp) completely agree with you!

Occasionally you find these little gems that place the entire argument out in such a perfect way - this is one of those.

But would it be enough to sway you toward joining the British republicans, 777236ER?

QFF
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:18 pm

Quoting QANTASFOREVER (Reply 29):
I think someone quoted a figure of 30million pounds a year before. Even if you spend ten million on a President - if you give a million pounds to twenty hospitals around Britain, I promise you it would make a huge difference. There are many effective ways that the money could be spend.

It isn't £30 million. As previously stated, he's including all the peripheral stuff that would have to be paid for anyway. The upkeep of palaces and castles isn't going to go away short of blowing them all up. The actual cost of the monarchy isn't very high at all, and no different to that of any other Head of State for a country like the UK. Unless of course, you go down the route of something like Ireland, which ain't gonna happen even if you had a Republic.

Where you get huge direct operating costs are for events like State visits and so forth. That'll still happen even if it's Jo Bloggs as President.

Even if it was true, £20 million is peanuts, and wouldn't make any material difference.

Quoting QANTASFOREVER (Reply 31):
I think it is important that some time is devoted to questioning the institution of the Monarchy

Of course. And if you're being fair about it, you'd agree that of all countries, the UK is pretty good at questioning just about everything about itself.

Quoting QANTASFOREVER (Reply 29):
The truth is, many people of the younger generation aren't awed by a sense of history and tradition - and would rather seek out best practice than remain loyal to ancient and occasionally antiquated institutions.

But as I keep saying (and no-one has even acknowledged the truth of this) this isn't remotely new. You can't say "young" people question it, because people always have. The current older generation is the same one that was quite keen on tearing up the whole thing and starting again in the 1960's. This is exactly the problem, in that people so often seem to look at the current situation and never recognise that today's older generation were young once. Any feeling that the current 60 year olds have spent their lives in adoration of the monarchy is utter balls, I'm afraid.

Every younger generation question it. It's their job, and it's healthy.

Quoting QANTASFOREVER (Reply 29):
It's also true that it exists because the Royal family are adept at self preservation.

That's a slightly pejorative way of saying they move with the times. It's half-full or half-empty, depending on your opinion.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 26):
you seem to be missing the whole point of why even a parliamentary monarchy is completely undemocratic.

No, YOU seem to be missing the point that the people want it. I am getting slightly fed up with people trying to claim that a system the people like and want is somehow undemocratic. How the bloody hell can it be undemocratic when the public approval for it runs at over 80%? Do you not understand what democracy is? We have to all intents and purposes a democratically chosen monarchy. It survives because people support it. They day they don't, it goes.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:02 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 33):
It isn't £30 million. As previously stated, he's including all the peripheral stuff that would have to be paid for anyway. The upkeep of palaces and castles isn't going to go away short of blowing them all up.

Well - it may not be £30 million, but the cost is substantial. If you had a republic you wouldn't be paying for an entire family, just the infrastructure around just one individual. In theory - this would be cheaper than the current arrangements.

Quoting Banco (Reply 33):
The actual cost of the monarchy isn't very high at all, and no different to that of any other Head of State for a country like the UK.

Yes, the cost of a President would be similar to the cost of a Queen. However, with a republic you're not paying for an heir, and heir's heir, and heir's heir's family etc etc etc.

Quoting Banco (Reply 33):
And if you're being fair about it, you'd agree that of all countries, the UK is pretty good at questioning just about everything about itself.

Certainly - the media especially.

Quoting Banco (Reply 33):
You can't say "young" people question it, because people always have.

True, I'd agree that many people across generations question the validity of the monarchy.

Quoting Banco (Reply 33):
How the bloody hell can it be undemocratic when the public approval for it runs at over 80%?

I guess it's because unlike a Presidential system where if the public is dissatisfied there is a vote every couple of years, if the public is dissatisfied with the monarchy it would involve a monumental, unprecedented, and resource consuming referendum to change the leadership.

QFF
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:03 pm

Quoting QANTASforever (Reply 34):
However, with a republic you're not paying for an heir, and heir's heir, and heir's heir's family etc etc etc.

We aren't either. I can't remember the exact breakdown, but I think the Civil list only applies to the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales. Certainly not extended families. It used to be the case, certainly, but no longer.

Quoting QANTASforever (Reply 34):
I guess it's because unlike a Presidential system where if the public is dissatisfied there is a vote every couple of years, if the public is dissatisfied with the monarchy it would involve a monumental, unprecedented, and resource consuming referendum to change the leadership.

That's true. But it doesn't change the central fact that the monarchy survives through the support and goodwill of the people. If the people wanted it abolished, abolished it would be.

Very few societies offer a vote on changing their entire political apparatus on a regular basis as you know more than most. They vote for a President, not a changing constitution. That's not quite the same of cours, because someone who wants to change the constitution can stand, but in real terms, it isn't entirely different.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:51 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 35):
We aren't either. I can't remember the exact breakdown, but I think the Civil list only applies to the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales.

I was always under the belief that Charles got nothing from the Civil List as his money is generated by the Duchy of Cornwall. I could be wrong but i'm pretty sure that is the case.
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4051
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sat Apr 22, 2006 11:57 pm

Quoting BHXFAOTIPYYC (Reply 27):
You got a lot more than that from Britain via EU funds I guarantee.

Don't worry, you paid a lot less than the Dutch and the Germans did. They don't have rebates, you know... and if it wasn't for that how could you make a living out of selling villas to overweight old golf-freaks?

And should I remind you who is the single largest individual beneficiary of European funds?

Quoting Banco (Reply 33):
How the bloody hell can it be undemocratic when the public approval for it runs at over 80%?

Aspiring to become a head of state is a right every citizen in a democracy has. If you want to abdicate that right it is your prerrogative but you cannot force me to abdicate of my right. So, as long as there is even one person in the U.K. (or any other monarchy) that wants that regime to end the status quo is not a democracy.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:35 am

Quoting Banco (Reply 35):
I think the Civil list only applies to the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales.

Don't forget to include their dependants. I'm quite sure Prince Andrew is included on the list. I believe there was a scandal a little while ago concerning his travel costs?

Quoting Banco (Reply 35):
If the people wanted it abolished, abolished it would be.

Banco, that is much much easier said than done.

Quoting Cornish (Reply 36):
I was always under the belief that Charles got nothing from the Civil List as his money is generated by the Duchy of Cornwall.

Either way, the people of Cornwall are Britons (although no doubt some would disagree). It's public money. If the citizens of my federal electorate's combined tax contribution pay for a government program, that doesn't mean that it's not considered a national tax burden. It all contributes.

QFF
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:39 am

Quoting QANTASforever (Reply 38):
Banco, that is much much easier said than done.

As you found out, given that you lost a bloody referendum on whether to scap the Queen as your head of state.

Who gets the feeling that Qantasforever creates more monarchists than republicans?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
vc10
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2001 4:13 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:49 am

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 37):
Aspiring to become a head of state is a right every citizen in a democracy has

Could be wrong but I believe in that Democracy called the USA, you might be a citizen, but unless you were born in the USA then you cannot be President

little vc10
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:55 am

Quoting Vc10 (Reply 40):
Could be wrong but I believe in that Democracy called the USA, you might be a citizen, but unless you were born in the USA then you cannot be President

Unless you're a film star and then they might look into changing the rules in future  Wink
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:23 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 39):
As you found out, given that you lost a bloody referendum on whether to scap the Queen as your head of state.

No, it's an entirely different system here than in the UK. It's far more difficult to approve changes to the constitution here than it is where you are.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 39):
Who gets the feeling that Qantasforever creates more monarchists than republicans?

If people are going to become monarchists based upon the arguments I present, then they were probably never really affirmed as republicans to begin with.

Can I ask, 777236ER; in the absence of insults directed toward you from me, why do you insist on having a go at me all the time? Do you feel a need to protect the sovereign from attack? Are you a committed monarchist? Or do you just have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to people looking at alternative forms of government?
I'm quite curious, as many other monarchists such as Banco, and Jafa39 - in finding their way to have a proper discussion with me, haven't really found me to be the unreasonable protagonist you so often portray me to be.

QFF

[Edited 2006-04-23 02:34:30]
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:38 am

Quoting QANTASforever (Reply 42):
Can I ask, 777236ER; in the absence of insults directed toward you from me, why do you insist on having a go at me all the time? Do you feel a need to protect the sovereign from attack? Are you a committed monarchist? Or do you just have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to people looking at alternative forms of government?

More importantly, why do you choose to continue to live in a constitutional monarchy whose wealth was created as a direct result of British traditions, when you hate those British traditions so much?

If you hate the monarchy that much, why not go and return to your homeland? If you don't like Australia as it is, you should leave.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:09 am

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 43):
More importantly, why do you choose to continue to live in a constitutional monarchy whose wealth was created as a direct result of British traditions, when you hate those British traditions so much?

You've made a false assumption - because I don't hate some British traditions. I recognise the various benefits of the Westminster system of government, but I also recognise its drawbacks. I recognise the benefits of an open economy, democracy, and the institutions that govern our society - but I still recognise some drawbacks there too.

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 43):
If you hate the monarchy that much, why not go and return to your homeland?

Well, for one thing Australia is my homeland. And if you're referring to the nation of my birth - I'm not too fond of the Monarchy there either.  Wink

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 43):
If you don't like Australia as it is, you should leave.

No, I'm not going to accept your advice there. I love Australia so much I'm willing to stay here and change our system of government by following the rules laid down by the founding fathers of the constitution. What I'm doing is entirely valid, and consistent with our committment to democracy and best practice as a nation. No doubt there are things about the UK and Canada that you disagree with, and yet you still live where you do. An overriding love for Australia is enough to keep me here. Surely you can understand this?

A wilingness to stay and fight for positive change in your country is a lot harder than just packing up and leaving - something you clearly favour.

QFF
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:18 am

Quoting QANTASforever (Reply 44):
Well, for one thing Australia is my homeland. And if you're referring to the nation of my birth - I'm not too fond of the Monarchy there either.

Well, why not go anyway? What's the problem? You would be rid of the Queen and her terrible influence on you.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:20 am

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 45):
Well, why not go anyway? What's the problem? You would be rid of the Queen and her terrible influence on you.

I've tried to engage in a mature discussion with you. Clearly you're more interested in behaving like a child.

QFF
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:25 pm

Quoting QANTASforever (Reply 46):
I've tried to engage in a mature discussion with you. Clearly you're more interested in behaving like a child.

And your endless rants about the monarchy are not childish, especially given that you are enjoying a 1st-world living standard that you owe in strong part to the British monarchy?

Pull the other one.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:48 pm

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 47):
And your endless rants about the monarchy are not childish, especially given that you are enjoying a 1st-world living standard that you owe in strong part to the British monarchy?

For one, I disagree with you on the basis that most contend that Australia was built by Australians, and also I reject your assertion that Australia's first world status is due to the Monarchy. To suggest such a thing is really, quite ridiculous.

QFF
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: The Independent... Two Fingers To The Queen

Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:58 pm

Quoting QANTASforever (Reply 48):
For one, I disagree with you on the basis that most contend that Australia was built by Australians,

Australia was built by Australians and Britons, both almost 100% of British background. The economic ethnic migrants, such as yourself, came later. Much later.

Your never ending attempts to minimize all things British in Australia is truly ridiculous. Shame on your denial of Australian reality.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests