epiphany Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Socialism and monarchism are mutually exclusive beliefs yet they seem to exist side by side in Britain. To me that seems irrational and ironic. Socialism is an economic ideology - it has nothing to do with whether the head of state is elected or not. You might be referring to a specific type of democratic socialism, but not socialism as a whole. It's too broad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomdido Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Just remind me, apart from Bloomdido, who attended this massive protest? Up to 1,000 apparently, and no media coverage to speak of. And it rained too, awwww! EPIC FAIL! Meanwhile, in other news, at the same time around a million people from all over the world turned up to help the Queen celebrate, and even Barak and Michelle sent her a nice message. EPIC WIN! All protest has to begin somewhere. Should Emily Pankhurst not have bothered because only a few fellow Suffragettes turned up? The press is complicit in the shaping of the Royal's new image and brainwashing the tabloid readers. They will come undone again, after all they are only human (except for automaton Liz). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybare Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Socialism is an economic ideology - it has nothing to do with whether the head of state is elected or not. You might be referring to a specific type of democratic socialism, but not socialism as a whole. It's too broad. Socialism definition from britannica "doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources." Is the crown not in control of vast swathes of wealth, property, natural resources? I'd say supporting that is the complete polar opposite of socialism. By default. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epiphany Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Is the crown not in control of vast swathes of wealth, property, natural resources? Yes, they do, but that's because they operate within the private property rights system. It sounds almost unfathomable, but we could still have a monarchy who merely controls (not owns) its royal estate. We'd effectively be renting that land to them. I just don't think socialism in general is necessarily antithetical to a constitutional monarchy. Certain forms of socialism, for example, would accept the compromise between outright stealing land and property from an established institution and taxing it accordingly ala Georgism. It's all a sliding scale, is it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 The irrational part of it all was summed up by a comedian on channel 4 the other night. Something like "all this fuss and emotion for someone else's grandma who happens to be queen of England by accident of birth and couldn't care less if we lived or died, in poverty or not." I'm very proud to be British but the monarchy has nothing to do with why. The other irrational part of British monarchism is evident when people voting labour and subscribing to socialist views at the same being ardent monarchists. Socialism and monarchism are mutually exclusive beliefs yet they seem to exist side by side in Britain. To me that seems irrational and ironic. Yes well there's a lot of irrationality about,we'll just have to live with it. By the way anybody who gets the impression from my last post i'm Xenophobiac,please read post 163. I'm not really,i just got a bit carried away with that little speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VideoPro Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the second, of Great Britain and the Commonwealth. Has amassed a fortune of some 17 trillion pounds in investments, cash, land, buildings and pieces of art. That's enough to end world poverty and hunger ten times over and still have enough left to live a life more luxurious than you or I could ever begin to imagine. Instead, she chooses to sit on it and do nothing. Rather than be subjected to the righteous fury that she so obviously deserves, this person is treated as someone to be admired, worshipped even. Of course she looks wonderful and has beautiful skin. So would you if you had never had occaision to worry about the unimportant things in life like an electricity bill or food for the kids and have your every whim catered for you by a bevy of servants. This is not a glorious tradition. It is a downright shame. A shame that the people of Great Britain have endured for centuries. It is a shame that needs to be ended now. Off with their heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomdido Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Rather than be subjected to the righteous fury that she so obviously deserves, this person is treated as someone to be admired, worshipped even. Of course she looks wonderful and has beautiful skin. So would you if you had never had occaision to worry about the unimportant things in life like an electricity bill or food for the kids and have your every whim catered for you by a bevy of servants. Well said. Have a Royal wedding, a big celebration and a Red Arrows flypast and most people seem to forget just how obscene and vulgar the Monarchy is. They go out and do sweeteners for British Companies wanting to export all sorts of things including weapons. They have generations of blood on their hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the second, of Great Britain and the Commonwealth. Has amassed a fortune of some 17 trillion pounds in investments, cash, land, buildings and pieces of art. The queen is worth about £349 million actually. Not even in the top ten of the worlds richest according to forbes. I think you need to go back and check your facts about what queenie actually OWNS rather than just occupys. You would be surprised how much of her stuff doesn't belong to her and is owned by the state - particuarly the rosta of properties under Crown Estate whose profits go straight to the treasury i.e. back into our own money pot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybare Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 The queen is worth about £349 million actually. Not even in the top ten of the worlds richest according to forbes. I think you need to go back and check your facts about what queenie actually OWNS rather than just occupys. You would be surprised how much of her stuff doesn't belong to her and is owned by the state - particuarly the rosta of properties under Crown Estate whose profits go straight to the treasury i.e. back into our own money pot. A personal art collection worth over £10 billion and a trust which has stakes in the bank of England not to mention countless other business. She may not be the sole owner of the entire 17 trillion but she surely benefits from it being held in her name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Well said. Have a Royal wedding, a big celebration and a Red Arrows flypast and most people seem to forget just how obscene and vulgar the Monarchy is. They go out and do sweeteners for British Companies wanting to export all sorts of things including weapons. They have generations of blood on their hands. Can't you be happy for the millions in their masses that have experienced the pleasure of this wonderful event,not just in Britain but in the Commonwealth countries and other parts of the world. What about the Concert? that was a great success even people on this forum have expressed that. These last few days will be an event that will go down in History,and you are lucky to have been in London at that time,one day you will be able to say to your grandchildren...I was there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.