Qualtrough Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 France attracted 53.7 million more tourists than us in 2012. Somehow I don't think the additional bodies were all going skiing. Presumably if a Monarchy is such a great attraction it's a bloody good job they got rid of theirs or no bugger would come here! Without the monarchy we'd still have the buildings and the history wouldn't we? And just like France we'd then be in a position to let people in to see them all wouldn't we? As I asked earlier exactly how many of our 29.3 tourist visitors actually got to see the Queen? The idea that continuing with an anachronistic undemocratic institution in this day and age to attract tourists is pretty pathetic. As is urinating in the wind. You can throw stats around but the majority of this nation have an emotional attachment to the monarchy and British history in general. There will never be sufficient pressure from the population to set up a referendum. Other than that there is only the guillotine option, even less likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliceBB Posted January 28, 2014 Author Share Posted January 28, 2014 Does that have to suggest we've inherited their bad traits, of course it doesn't. All that inbreeding between European royal houses in the 19th century didn't help.They've inherited each other's bad traits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 All that inbreeding between European royal houses in the 19th century didn't help.They've inherited each other's bad traits.Apart from an odd few, I don't really think most of the offspring have turned out too bad, all things considered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Clowning Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 All that inbreeding between European royal houses in the 19th century didn't help.They've inherited each other's bad traits. Well they live a ripe old age to say they are marred with in breading. What are the 'bad traits' the Queen has inherited ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 As is urinating in the wind. You can throw stats around but the majority of this nation have an emotional attachment to the monarchy and British history in general. There will never be sufficient pressure from the population to set up a referendum. Other than that there is only the guillotine option, even less likely. I've no problem debating the pros and cons of the monarchy but trying to compare France and the uk as equal tourist destinations is bonkers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 My knowledge of history is quite good. Why should they be blamed for what they their ancestors did? They know their heritage. If we knew our own as far back as they do, more then a few of us may be surprised to discover that some of those we are descended from may have been criminals, thieves or villains. Does that have to suggest we've inherited their bad traits, of course it doesn't. They shouldn't of course, that would be ridiculous and unfair wouldn't it? So please answer me this, why should they be rewarded for what their ancestors did? Want it both ways you royalists don't you? ---------- Post added 28-01-2014 at 23:54 ---------- As is urinating in the wind. You can throw stats around but the majority of this nation have an emotional attachment to the monarchy and British history in general. There will never be sufficient pressure from the population to set up a referendum. Other than that there is only the guillotine option, even less likely. Having an attachment to British history is fine, as long as you accept ALL British history and don't try to 'cherry pick'. You are OK with the slave trade for hundreds of years? OK with the Opium War? OK with the Amritsar massacre? OK with the torture of Kenyans for which we have just paid out 19.9 million in compensation? OK with the invention of concentration camps in South Africa where over 100,000 died? And you have no problem with the annihilation of a unique race of people, the Tazmanian Aborigines? There's more, but I'm sure you get the drift. You Jingoistic monarchists are a sweet bunch, or maybe your not that bad just simply ignorant of your own country's history? ---------- Post added 29-01-2014 at 00:02 ---------- Well they live a ripe old age to say they are marred with in breading. What are the 'bad traits' the Queen has inherited ? Well let me see. When she attended the funeral of the mother of her grandchildren she did not shed a tear. However, when she attended the decommissioning and final sail of the royal yacht Britannia, tears flowed down her cheeks. That would seem to me very much like a person who values 'things' over people. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qualtrough Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 They shouldn't of course, that would be ridiculous and unfair wouldn't it? So please answer me this, why should they be rewarded for what their ancestors did? Want it both ways you royalists don't you? ---------- Post added 28-01-2014 at 23:54 ---------- Having an attachment to British history is fine, as long as you accept ALL British history and don't try to 'cherry pick'. You are OK with the slave trade for hundreds of years? OK with the Opium War? OK with the Amritsar massacre? OK with the torture of Kenyans for which we have just paid out 19.9 million in compensation? OK with the invention of concentration camps in South Africa where over 100,000 died? And you have no problem with the annihilation of a unique race of people, the Tazmanian Aborigines? There's more, but I'm sure you get the drift. You Jingoistic monarchists are a sweet bunch, or maybe your not that bad just simply ignorant of your own country's history? ---------- Post added 29-01-2014 at 00:02 ---------- Well let me see. When she attended the funeral of the mother of her grandchildren she did not shed a tear. However, when she attended the decommissioning and final sail of the royal yacht Britannia, tears flowed down her cheeks. That would seem to me very much like a person who values 'things' over people. What do you think? I'm aware of Britain's historical dark side. However, if we're supposed to collapse with liberal guilt then no. It doesn't change anything about the monarchy and how people look upon it. Britain's history is littered with the atrocities of all western nations. Even Belgium oppressed the Congo. I was a Republican in my youth. I later learned about the shades of grey and that despite everything, the monarchy is essentially good and will never disappear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Clowning Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 Well let me see. When she attended the funeral of the mother of her grandchildren she did not shed a tear. However, when she attended the decommissioning and final sail of the royal yacht Britannia, tears flowed down her cheeks. That would seem to me very much like a person who values 'things' over people. What do you think? You don't have to keep strong and dignified for a ship unlike for your grand children, and if your talking of Dianna I would say there was a bit of a rift going on behind closed doors with her messing about with different folk in public, something that I assume she would frown upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliceBB Posted January 29, 2014 Author Share Posted January 29, 2014 I do not have any strong views one way or another as far as the Queen as a person is concerned and it seems a bit silly to judge her on the basis of her emotional reactions at one funeral and one yacht decommissioning. She seems to me to have done an all-consuming job with some grace and integrity, (although there again, so do most public servants and for far less money). It's the institution (of monarchy) which I feel is redundant, and there are some members of it (Philip, Charles, Camilla, Andrew & Sarah F + kids) whose behaviour has been a disgrace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 They shouldn't of course, that would be ridiculous and unfair wouldn't it? So please answer me this, why should they be rewarded for what their ancestors did? It all depends what you mean by reward, I don't think they're are many of us who would wish to swap places with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.