Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks

Keep the monarchy?

Yes - they are personally important to me and must stay.
5
14%
No - they are irrelevant to me and serve no purpose. Give it a year and they won't be missed.
23
64%
Couldn't give a stuff either way.
8
22%
 
Total votes: 36

User avatar
Thang-y
Posts: 974
Joined: 29 Apr 2016, 17:59
Contact:

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby Thang-y » 05 Dec 2017, 16:30

Oh and the other day German Dave posted on here chiding someone for taking the piss on this thread and suggesting it not being encouraging to newcomers (or words along those lines). He then deleted it. I said on the sexual assault thread that I'd post this here too: don't stop on my account. There is an ignore function. Besides, over there and on this thread there were valid points coming from it.

User avatar
The Prof
Composing a revolutionary symphony
Posts: 44904
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby The Prof » 05 Dec 2017, 16:40

Thang-y wrote:
The Prof wrote:There's plenty more stuff to get angry about.


I don't think most republicans are angry at all, despite the privileges of the unelected subject matter,


I wouldn't be to sure about that. I just saw Pete this afternoon.

Image

he's FURIOUS.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 64213
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby Diamond Dog » 05 Dec 2017, 17:09

:lol:
In science, the most important criteria for success is not being stunningly full of shit.

User avatar
kewl klive
cultural defective
Posts: 14224
Joined: 29 Sep 2007, 00:32
Location: Petrus inhibito pompus

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby kewl klive » 05 Dec 2017, 17:57

All bark, no bite. 8-)
Lonely Kal wrote:John posted a picture of me which he'd doctored nastily.

Ho Ho Hodgson wrote:I know you think I pick on you.

Baldy K wrote:I'd love to meet Jeemo (no idea if he'd like to meet me).

User avatar
Rayge
Posts: 11333
Joined: 14 Aug 2013, 11:37
Location: deepest Devon
Contact:

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby Rayge » 05 Dec 2017, 18:06

Image
KAT/COYS

You can't play a tune on an absolute

When the ball sleeps it dreams it is a Frisbee

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. Love is the law, love under will

User avatar
Thang-y
Posts: 974
Joined: 29 Apr 2016, 17:59
Contact:

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby Thang-y » 05 Dec 2017, 18:22

Rayge wrote:Image


Maybe it's just me but the phrase springing to mind with that is

"Get orf moi laaaaaaaand!"

User avatar
Harvey K-Tel
Long Player
Posts: 38967
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 23:20
Location: 1220 on your AM dial

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby Harvey K-Tel » 05 Dec 2017, 18:31

If you've got nothing to do, don't do it here.

User avatar
German Dave
Utter Cad
Posts: 50128
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby German Dave » 05 Dec 2017, 18:44

Thang-y wrote:Oh and the other day German Dave posted on here chiding someone for taking the piss on this thread and suggesting it not being encouraging to newcomers (or words along those lines). He then deleted it.


:? Are you sure about that? This sounds like mistaken identity since I do not recall doing any such thing (either the chiding or the deleting).
kewl klive wrote:A deluxe Sandinista! was pulled when only one outtake could be found.


User avatar
Thang-y
Posts: 974
Joined: 29 Apr 2016, 17:59
Contact:

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby Thang-y » 05 Dec 2017, 18:47

My mistake, it's still there and maybe it wasn't that strong. But I'd call that chiding.

German Dave wrote:
The Unfragrant Ox wrote:THEY ARE ANGRY AND THEY WANT ANSWERS

Image


I must say, John, you've really excelled yourself on this thread - you remind me of certain kids I teach.

And then you moan how no-one posts on the board any more. Cunning stuntery of the highest order.

User avatar
Copehead
BCB Cup Stalinist
Posts: 22689
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:51
Location: at sea

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby Copehead » 05 Dec 2017, 19:25

The Modernist wrote:I've come across it in some areas more than others. I remember being very aware of it when I was trying to get "ahead" in publishing in London for example. I became very aware that I just didn't have the right background in terms of university and schooling. I'd approach it very differently now and go more left-field, concentrating on small publishers, but at the time I was just discouraged.
I agree very much with that last paragraph.


I was lucky to be academically drawn to the world of science which is far more meritocratic.

There is no equivalent of getting your nephew Tarquin in to the magazine to write gibberish that the sub-eds can knock into coherence in science, you can either do it or you cant and if you can't you don't have a job.

Perhaps writing isn't the obvious example because to do very well you probably need a genuine talent but the top end of article writing is so small you can fill that pool with fish from the upper echelons of society in the main anyway.

The upper classes have less of a grip over the magisteria of science since universal state education because it has to be be genuinely meritocratic for obvious reasons.

They still seem to do pretty well at sowing up Law but perhaps at the top end it is just a much smaller world than Science like periodical writing.

But generally the upper middle classes excel in areas where clueless chancers with the right tie can get on with a bit of bonhomie and a cut class accent - banking, trading, publishing, politics.

The real upper classes, of course, don't actually need to get jobs at all. Which is the whole point.
You've rendered that scaffolding dangerous

Image

Bear baiting & dog fights a speciality.

User avatar
German Dave
Utter Cad
Posts: 50128
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby German Dave » 05 Dec 2017, 19:40

Thang-y wrote:My mistake, it's still there and maybe it wasn't that strong. But I'd call that chiding.


Ah right, fair enough. Completely warranted, of course.
kewl klive wrote:A deluxe Sandinista! was pulled when only one outtake could be found.


User avatar
kewl klive
cultural defective
Posts: 14224
Joined: 29 Sep 2007, 00:32
Location: Petrus inhibito pompus

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby kewl klive » 05 Dec 2017, 22:21

Rayge wrote:Image


Fucking hell, Prince Harry is looking overworked there - get him a throne and a bagful of cash.
Lonely Kal wrote:John posted a picture of me which he'd doctored nastily.

Ho Ho Hodgson wrote:I know you think I pick on you.

Baldy K wrote:I'd love to meet Jeemo (no idea if he'd like to meet me).

User avatar
echolalia
Posts: 4166
Joined: 21 Jul 2006, 02:23
Location: Way Out West

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby echolalia » 06 Dec 2017, 02:05

The Prof wrote:
echolalia wrote:Portugal (1974)


Interesting.

I hadn't heard of The Carnation Revolution before. The Portuguese Monarchy was overthrown in 1910 leading to a chaotic 16 year Republic followed by a psudo-fasist dictatorship. Overthrown peacefully in 1974.
I'm not sure if there are any lessons for us now but it was an interesting read.
There''s still some kind of unofficial Royal family - is that right?

Well, the man who would be king is still around. He’s a public figure – a minor celebrity. But no one really wants a return to monarchy and his chances of fucking up the country on behalf of his own lineage are very remote.

1974 was a bloodless military coup but things got pretty giddy in the aftermath and for a time it looked as if Portugal would join the Soviet bloc. It was a very anarchic period – I’ve heard lots of stories of mansions overrun by gangs of abandoned, semi-feral children. The democratic left won out.

This song (recorded in Chateau d’Hérouville in 1971) was the sign for the revolution to start – when it played on the radio, the tanks/good times did roll:


User avatar
Thang-y
Posts: 974
Joined: 29 Apr 2016, 17:59
Contact:

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby Thang-y » 06 Dec 2017, 13:08

Thang-y wrote:Politically, I believe they're powerless but I'm about to read the articles you posted. Legally, however, she is sovereign. That may have a bearing on it ... [*edit: yes I think the connection/logic is probably that in the same way you won't get a R. -vs- R. prosecution, a legal step against the crown, similarly they want consent in passing laws affecting the crown*]


Speaking of the power and accountability of the head of state, I see that Trump's lawyer is trying to claim that: "(The) President cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer under (the Constitution's Article II) and has every right to express his view of any case."

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/04/polit ... index.html

Nice try but Trump will remain accountable. He has to. Right?


User avatar
Darryl Strawberry
Posts: 7071
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 21:10
Location: Under the watchful eye of the Clive police

Re: Monarchy the institution. Yes or no?

Postby Darryl Strawberry » 07 Dec 2017, 16:36

The Prince of Wales has admitted he privately lobbied Alex Salmond to promote a charity that wanted to win contracts to train new teachers in Scotland, according to official documents released following a lengthy disclosure battle.

Four months after the Scottish government refused to release the unredacted correspondence to the Guardian, ministers have relented and produced papers detailing how the prince personally lobbied the then first minister in June 2013.

A previously censored letter confirms that the charity Teach First used the meeting between “our patron, HRH the Prince Charles” and Salmond to pressure the then Scottish education secretary, Mike Russell, into meeting its chief executive, Brett Wigdortz.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
John Coan, with nothing else to do, wrote:I just Googled his name!