Would You Vote For A British Republic?

[Al Bundy]

Just now, despritdan said:

I'd vote to keep them because they're part of our history and tradition, they keep us entertained, they speak very nicely and always keep their fingernails clean.

 

Bloody snobs.

[cressida]

5 minutes ago, despritdan said:

I'd vote to keep them because they're part of our history and tradition, they keep us entertained, they speak very nicely and always keep their fingernails clean.

hahaha  ok

Edited December 21, 2022 by cressida

[Anna B]

10 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

 

Bloody snobs.

IMO the middle classes are the biggest snobs, desperate to claw their way up. The real upper classes, old money aristos, are mostly unaware of their own privilege, why would they be? They rarely mix with the lower orders and when they do, they tend to benignly treat them as pets.  

 

Charles, because of his job - meeting the general public and often people in need, is probably more aware than most of the club.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Anna B

[Dromedary]

39 minutes ago, Anna B said:

IMO the middle classes are the biggest snobs, desperate to claw their way up.

I think I actually agree with you on that one, especially when it come to those who own their homes.

 

39 minutes ago, Anna B said:

The real upper classes, old money aristos, are mostly unaware of their own privilege, why would they be? They rarely mix with the lower orders and when they do, they tend to benignly treat them as pets.  

I don't think you have mixed with any real upper classes by the sounds of it.

 

39 minutes ago, Anna B said:

Charles, because of his job - meeting the general public and often people in need, is probably more aware than most of the club.

Give over! He is happy when he get suitcases full of money bunged his way, hell he is not going to diminish his own wealth is he! Mind you he did pass on the £1 billion Duchy Of Cornwall estate that now nets Wills and co £21 Million a year in income. Now you know why Kate always has a sickly grin on her face as if the wind has made it stick! 

[Guest]

On 21/12/2022 at 00:27, m williamson said:

I'm a republican and would vote for a British Republic, however I totally accept that it will never happen. The British are raised to be servile and accept their place. Not every British person goes along with that, but enough do to allow the anachronistic nonsense to continue.

This country has a dirge of an anthem which proclaims a wish for the unelected sovereign to long reign over us. Parliament is sovereign, not the people. An unelected Upper House has an input into political decisions, the voting system isn't fit for purpose allowing a political party to have an unassailable majority despite less than half of the electorate voting for them. We have an unwritten constitution meaning that it is indecipherable to the general public and requires a constitutional expert to explain it.

 

A genuine democracy has a written constitution laying down the citizens rights and responsibilities in a way that any reasonably intelligent person can understand and anyone applying to become a citizen can both understand and be questioned on.

The people are sovereign, the constitution has been agreed and voted on and the state cannot change it without the peoples permission obtained by referendum.

That's a true democracy, what we have is a pretend democracy where the people are allowed to vote in a system which doesn't reflect their wishes but suits the politicians who were elected under the unfit for purpose system which they wish to retain and they have nothing but contempt for the general public.

 

Having got that off my chest I can assure all of you who can see no problem with our current system that you have absolutely no need to worry. 

As I said in the first sentence, it won't change, it suits those in power and they don't care what we think.

I agree with you fully except the first sentence.  I am not a Republican but neither am I enthusiastic about  keeping a Monarchy in it's present form.

What you have shown and what I also believe is that our problem is not the Monarch but the politicians and our political and voting system.

Having a Republic would therefore change nothing at all.

We should definitely be shouting for a new voting system because without that, we cannot change anything at all. 

Edited December 22, 2022 by Organgrinder

[Rockers rule]

7 hours ago, m williamson said:

Typical from one of the 🐏. No rational argument so resorts to infantile response.

Let me reply in kind, baa baa baa

Time and time again.

Same old dross - boring 😴

[m williamson]

39 minutes ago, Rockers rule said:

Time and time again.

Same old dross - boring 😴

In which case why don't you stop doing it?

[m williamson]

1 hour ago, Organgrinder said:

I agree with you fully except the first sentence.  I am not a Republican but neither am I enthusiastic about  keeping a Monarchy in it's present form.

What you have shown and what I also believe is that it our problem is not the Monarch but the politicians and our political and voting system.

Having a Republic would therefore change nothing at all.

We should definitely be shouting for a new voting system because without that, we cannot change anything at all. 

The major difference is that in a true democracy useless politicians get voted out. Monarchies last forever, useless or not. Charles falling of his polo pony before impregnating Diana would have resulted in King Andrew. Instead it's King Charles that the military, the police and the judiciary have to swear an oath to. A man who himself swore an oath in front of the nation to be faithfull to his first wife with no intention of keeping it even as he said the words. Charles is not a particularly reputable figure, selling off gifts from other countries, accepting cash for titles, recieving suitcases full of cash and getting his valet to take the fall.  Royalty is a completely anachronistic piece of nonsense in this day and age. However, as I said in my first post, it won't change.

 

The voting system however does need to change, FPTP is undemocratic but when we were offered an alternative in 2011 it was AV not PR that was the choice.  PR has been in use in Northern Ireland since 1973 so why wasn't it the alternative offered? Because the politicians don't want it and their requirements take precedence over the public. Contempt for the electorate is blatantly obvious.

 

 

[hackey lad]

15 minutes ago, m williamson said:

The major difference is that in a true democracy useless politicians get voted out. Monarchies last forever, useless or not. Charles falling of his polo pony before impregnating Diana would have resulted in King Andrew. Instead it's King Charles that the military, the police and the judiciary have to swear an oath to. A man who himself swore an oath in front of the nation to be faithfull to his first wife with no intention of keeping it even as he said the words. Charles is not a particularly reputable figure, selling off gifts from other countries, accepting cash for titles, recieving suitcases full of cash and getting his valet to take the fall.  Royalty is a completely anachronistic piece of nonsense in this day and age. However, as I said in my first post, it won't change.

 

The voting system however does need to change, FPTP is undemocratic but when we were offered an alternative in 2011 it was AV not PR that was the choice.  PR has been in use in Northern Ireland since 1973 so why wasn't it the alternative offered? Because the politicians don't want it and their requirements take precedence over the public. Contempt for the electorate is blatantly obvious.

 

 

In your post  number 11 your fine with it . Now you say it needs to change . As I said before, you are conflicted 

[m williamson]

3 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

In your post  number 11 your fine with it . Now you say it needs to change . As I said before, you are conflicted 

Where did I say that I was fine with it? I didn't, read it again. What I said was that I could assure all of you who can see no problem with our current system that you have nothing to worry about because I can't see it changing. That's not saying I'm fine with it, I said it was unfit for purpose and we have a pretend democracy rather than a true democracy. Acknowledging that other people disagree is simply accepting the way things are, not being fine with it. Parliament is sovereign in this country not the people, so they get to dictate how things are.

 

When it comes to comprehension you struggle a bit don't you?