Royalty

I came onto my computer to correct just that, as it would not correct from my mobile phone, from which both posts were sent. I may be wrong about many a thing, but my understanding of the English language is rather better than some others.

I don't suppose for one minute, that Clive began this thread, expecting 100% agreement with his view. Why so many on here think their minority view (in the UK) should be forced down other people's throats, is beyond me.

But maybe there is hope for you lot. I think the monarchy will be diminished with the passing of our present queen. Each younger generation tends to throw off the likes of older generations, and I predict that the royal family here may nearly vanish in years to come. This, for me, is the last of what has been memorable, and (again, to me) remarkable about this institution.

Years ago, a little lady was sent from Grenada to the UK.

...

I'm related to her. Its little things like that, that matter, to an almost invisible people, on a tiny island, far away.

Small islands, high incest and inbreeding. It's the little things that matter ;)

If you're going to be such a troll yourself GA2G, then obviously we'll all troll back.

You're thinking of Carriacou.....which David, is extremely astute of you. Though Grenada is tiny, Carriacou is a strip of inhabited land, and truly, I can't think of a place with more inbreeding than there. Oh yes, Carriacou is an island, that is part of the smaller islands that make up the nation state of Grenada.

Had a girlfriend from there once. Dead posh, and thankfully had an anything goes attitude beneath the sheets. She lives here in London. :-)

Who's trolling (apart form the photos....snigger), I really am a Royalist. What's wrong with that? Would it be more cool, or more acceptable if I was a Marxist? I'm not. I am a staunch supporter of this monarch. But I don't think my support for the royal family will be the same, when she is gone. I won't be against them, unless they all turn out to be like Prince Edward.

This gentleman has been my favourite royal for many years.

In 7 days he'll celebrate 66 years as king, adored by his nation.

It works for some countries. Doesn't work for others. Like all political systems. Good shout Malaysian. Ooops....TM.

Who's trolling

You are. When you're bristling over and starting to call people out and getting all worked up and flooding the threads and attacking anyone with views that differ... then you are.

I'm not a royalist, but my girlfriends sister is up from Cornwall mostly to take part in this crowded waste of money (the crowds will prove how popular the monarchy is) so I saw bits of the documentary last night (whilst reading Lfgss on my phone) and...

Did he talk about how few *weeks *his parents saw him during his first five years?

Yes he did.

Isn't it more like idolatry or fetishism?

So just like Organised religion?

C'mon David, at first this was a simple view versus view on a political system. Then James felt he had to come on here and stir.......this as you well know, is personal. If you don't see the direction after that, then there's not much I can say.

Yes, I knew this, but it is a matter of scale.

A rather low blow there Clive, but I don't think I have ever read the Daily Express; my newspaper of choice is the Guardian. As for my knowledge of political theory is concerned, it is certainly broader than many other people's I think. I have lived in many countries, and as long as I have known myself, I would discuss politics - first with my grandfather (regarding the Vietnam War), then later as an adult, when living in Cameroon, I would discuss the political climate with any and everyone. Sadly though, most of my exposure was to career diplomats, or academics. But I still managed to talk with the average citizen, to find out what they wanted politically. I was very interested.

In Africa, we* have Presidents that work to change the law and the constitution, so as to enable themselves to continue in power long after is legal. Paul Biya is one, and there are many others. So, is a democratically elected president really such an improvement, for everyone?

*It should be THEY, as I am not a citizen of any African country.

I believe my point was, that the present Monarch is above financial corruption. My affection for the rest of her family becomes drastically reduced, the further the apple falls from the tree.

And to answer your last statement.....Paul Biya isn't a dictator. He is democratically elected. But as with many presidents, he is moulding the system to suit himself. And yes, it is expected that Paul Biya somehow will hand over to his son, who is still a mere youth.

The American example of a republic, and a their presidential system - I like that one. The others, I don't like as much. And its my view that the monarchy here isn't so bad. But even Liz won't hand over to Chuck, now would Andy or Freeloader Eddie be given a shout, because she knows worthless when she sees it. Its working well here........but clearly, its not universally appreciated.

GAG, a president, however democratially elected who moulds the process to keep himself in power and place his som in after him is not democratic.

The issue we have is with the monarchy and not with one individual. A system that means that Charles inherits by virtue of his birth is wrong. The Queen has no option, under the current system, to do anything other than hand over to her eldest son.

You may like the American system but you do not explain why you don't like Parliamentary democracy and why you dismiss the republican systems of Ireland, Finland or Germany (or indeed many other places).

I like the American system more, for the simple reason that I have lived there, so know it better. I've never been to Ireland*, Finland or Germany, nor looked into their politics, so couldn't give any opinion on those. But especially Germany's, I think could be an excellent example.

I did also say, when I posted earlier, that it is highly possible that coming from Grenada may have coloured my judgement, as to affections for this monarchy. It is also the case that Third World presidents may have put me off somewhat from the republican system. A misfortune of fate, is where I was raised, and the peoples that I was raised with. .

*Financial irregularities?

This is how it was...........political view versus political view.

To those of you misery-guts that do not appreciate the monarchy
Why do you constantly feel the need to belittle people who have views different to yours?

Being opposed to privilege passing through a blood line of the last family to invade and pillage a nation seems fairly reasonable to me.

I like America very much, and Americans make truer friends than almost anybody else.

Fucking lol.

Why do you constantly feel the need to belittle people who have views different to yours?

Being opposed to privilege passing through a blood line of the last family to invade and pillage a nation seems fairly reasonable to me.

Object, that comment of mine was a clear joke. No-one can be a misery-guts, nor a happy-Jack, based on their political leanings. C'mon Object. Really.

As a matter of fact, my favourite political system, is Communism, and that is even though I know it doesn't work. But on paper, its nearly unbeatable. The stock market and banking crashes proves that Marx was right. And to keep the system alive, capitalism failed, and banks had to be nationalised. Yet still, I am a royalist.....which defies logic as clearly as supporting Communism or Capitalism.....based on your original standpoint.

There is no conversation I like more than to discuss politics. So what, if I stand my ground against the louder voices of reason? If I am a minority on this forum in supporting this monarch, then so be it. But why should I slink around hoping not to be noticed? I strongly believe that this monarchy is a good thing. I've seen republics that have turned me off the presidential system.

Patronising, condescending, an innate and misplaced sense of self worth, dismissal and disregard of others viewpoints as lacking merit or intelligence, lacking in irony…

you've morphed with the queen!!

So all these were jokes too?

Andypandy

that comment was just stupid. Very.

Envy. It is such a nasty, smelly affair.

You lot need a wash.

would easier be envious of diptheria. You revulse me absolutely.

And you can't spell a simple word like chief. Tragic.

You state that discussing politics is one of your favourite things in life. You may get more credit or positive response for your royal leanings if you could have a conversation with people in an adult manner. Or do you always seek to make it such a one sided affair?

I thought Andyp wouldn't mind me calling him Andypandy, just as I don't mind being called Gags, Gaggle, or Gaggy.

I did think Ed's comment was stupid.

Nasty, smelly, and needing a wash, was a play on words. Unless you actually believe that I think envy has a smell, or that I think forumengers need a bath, if they have a different view? Really? Sigh.............

James comes onto threads that he has NO interest in, simply to target me. Everyone knows that, and I'm surprised that you didn't.

The chief thing was in response to a neg-rep, which I thought completely uncalled for. There are people that have come onto this thread simply to put a boot in. No particular wish to discuss politics, but just to try to have a go. My view is political. And since I have no others agreeing with me, then my point is made against a clamouring din. I don't mind that. I still have a view, albeit, different to most here.

Repped Object, for being a sound fella.

Patronising, condescending, an innate and misplaced sense of self worth, dismissal and disregard of others viewpoints as lacking merit or intelligence, lacking in irony…..

Patronising - Guilty
Condescending - Guilty
Misplaced sense of self worth - Nonsense. We are all priceless.
Dismissal of others viewpoints - Its called argument, and this is one. Otherwise, its an agreement. No?
Lacking in irony - I have admitted this many times over the years.

3 out of 5. You win. Yet I don't lose. So where does this lead? Independence? Thats where I was hoping it would lead, but no.....you just want me to agree with everyone, all the time. Thanks, but thats not a world for me.

Serious question.

Why can't a Royalist take part in discussions on a thread called Royalty? And why should I be expected to follow the anti group? I think a presidential republic has lots of merit, its just that I think this monarchy does too. So why can't I take one side, and then stick with it?

Jerry Lee Lewis - Great Balls Of Fire! - YouTube

I did think Ed's comment was stupid.

Gaggle, have you realised I never return the favour of belittling you? even when you were trying very hard to convinced me that bigger tyres have more rolling resistance?

Even if my comment are stupid, did everyone pointed it out? no, just you.

As you were.

Serious question.

Why can't a Royalist take part in discussions on a thread called Royalty? And why should I be expected to follow the anti group? I think a presidential republic has lots of merit, its just that I think this monarchy does too. So why can't I take one side, and then stick with it?

You can, but you went beyond discussion and in your own word it's an argument.

That you then turned personal and made attacks on individuals is why lots of reasonable people are now turning on you. You veil threats and stomp your feet, it comes across as both threatening and childish. A bully to anyone who doesn't share your views.

The fundamental problem is similar to that of religion, if you grow up accepting something and being told things by those around you, then you may not ever question it rigorously. It becomes more of a faith based set of beliefs rather than a reasoned one. Then, when others question your views you find yourself lacking the answers and choose to get personal with those who are asking the questions.

It's fine to have faith based beliefs. Just don't try and then argue in a reasoned debate based on faith. It's what trips up most religious people too. Logic is a trap for faith, and faith cannot stand on the same ground.

The flipside to that is that faith is a trap for logical people... you could've conceded the faith based element to being a Royalist, and thus infuriated all of those attempting to use reasoning.

You could've done a lot of things. But you chose to make lots of personal attacks.

I dot really have an issue with the Queen herself. She always gets a round in, tells the filthiest jokes and isn't afraid to make her point.

But her offspring really do wind me up.

Don't get me started on "the establishment": the hangers on, the real leeches in this arrangement. They're the only people who're seriously interested in keeping the concept of monarchy alive and kicking in this country because without it there would be thousands more unemployed and unemployable people.

As long as Charles doesn't get crowned King, then the world remains wonderful.

As long as Charles doesn't get crowned King, then the world remains wonderful.

I think it's inevitable.

I've seen the queue, he's in the front. Unless something occurs that makes him leave the queue (unlikely), it's him.

It could be worse though, 5th in line is Beatrice.

She's had more helmets than Barry Sheene.