Whose up for some pro-Democracy protests in the UK?

[Viet Minh]

It seems to be catching on, maybe we should have some protests here as well?

[Revolutionair]

How about some pro-socialist protests, cause in that case I would join you if I was British.

[Viet Minh]

How about some pro-socialist protests, cause in that case I would join you if I was British.

I'm all for it, I was basically just highlighting the fact the UK and US, who seem to always cry Democracy, are actually far from being truly Democratic countries themselves. It would be interesting to see the reaction to large scale pro-Democracy protests.

Besides I really really really want to lynch David Cameron! :) :)

[Bud Struggle]

A thousand to one--more people are interested in her wedding gown.

http://gulfnews.com/polopoly_fs/prince-william-and-kate-middleton-1.715449!image/2991069950.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_475/2991069950.jpg

[#FF0000]

IIIIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii don't know. I'm not from Britain but I was kind of under the impression that folks aren't so thrilled with the royal family anymore.

[ComradeMan]

IIIIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii don't know. I'm not from Britain but I was kind of under the impression that folks aren't so thrilled with the royal family anymore.

They say that but when I was there a lot of them seem obsessed by it- especially if there is a wedding or something! :lol: In Italy it's the same- we are in a republic "founded on work" that abolished monarchy by fair means and foul ;) after the Second World War and the amount of media attention the British Royal family get is amazing at times- more than the House of Savoy- our "royal family"- LOL!!!

[RGacky3]

Bud ... Why you being a debbie downer, people in the UK are rising up and pro-democracy movements are popping up, and you gotta throw in some douchy comment to try and diminish it.

If a paralized dude learned to walk you'd probably say "yeah, but his legs are shakey."

Plus, its apples and oranges your comparing.

[Lord Testicles]

IIIIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii don't know. I'm not from Britain but I was kind of under the impression that folks aren't so thrilled with the royal family anymore.

I could count the amount of people I've met who didn't think they were parasites on one hand.

[Viet Minh]

There is a strong opposition to them, but a lot of it is cultural rather than socialist. Maybe in some alternate universe the Stuarts are still on the throne, and scotland and Ireland fans are singing God save the King/ Queen :D ).
Modern Royalists fall into 3 categories to my mind
1. Tory fucks who see them as the epitome of the ruling clarses
2. Uncle Tom type working class reactionaries, the same idiots who vote BNP, not realising the Queen is part of the system that brings in the slave cheap labour in the first place
3. Japanese tourists.

There is also a general impression of them 'serving the people', clearly this is bollocks but I still don't envy the Queen having boring as fuck tea parties with inbreds day after day.

[Demogorgon]

IIIIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii don't know. I'm not from Britain but I was kind of under the impression that folks aren't so thrilled with the royal family anymore.
The Monarchy remains very popular I am afraid. To be sure some members of the Royal Family are less than adored, but the monarchy as an institution is extremely popular. Of course it is easy to differentiate the Queen from some of her idiot relatives, not least because the media is obliging enough not to mention her personally when they are playing up, but even so people seem remarkably keen not to place the blame on the institution.

Also of course Britain has this vacuous celebrity culture and the Royal Family do fit the role of celebrities well.

Mind you, the hypocrisy surrounding the wedding is something else. The right wing tabloids like the Mail and the Express will decry every aspect of public spending that might actually help someone as a "waste of money in these difficult times", but see no problem blowing a fortune on this circus.

[ComradeMan]

The Monarchy remains very popular I am afraid. To be sure some members of the Royal Family are less than adored, but the monarchy as an institution is extremely popular. Of course it is easy to differentiate the Queen from some of her idiot relatives, not least because the media is obliging enough not to mention her personally when they are playing up, but even so people seem remarkably keen not to place the blame on the institution.

Also of course Britain has this vacuous celebrity culture and the Royal Family do fit the role of celebrities well.

Mind you, the hypocrisy surrounding the wedding is something else. The right wing tabloids like the Mail and the Express will decry every aspect of public spending that might actually help someone as a "waste of money in these difficult times", but see no problem blowing a fortune on this circus.

If I were the queen, with some of my relations, I'd become a communist! :lol:

[Viet Minh]

The tories are cutting public services across the board, including battered womens refuges, but i bet his elite social club buddies could probably raise that much capital just by moving their offshore accounts to one of the big fat cat banks here.

On the subject of Royalty, I can understand why leftists oppose them ideologically, as do I, but they hold very little power if any. To my mind the Church leaders should be the first against the wall come the Revolution!

[ComradeMan]

The tories are cutting public services across the board, including battered womens refuges, but i bet his elite social club buddies could probably raise that much capital just by moving their offshore accounts to one of the big fat cat banks here.

On the subject of Royalty, I can understand why leftists oppose them ideologically, as do I, but they hold very little power if any. To my mind the Church leaders should be the first against the wall come the Revolution!

And by the Act of Supremacy is the English monarch not the head of the Church of England- the established church of the state religion, i.e. the Anglo-Catholic/Anglican communion?

I'm not a big fan of putting people against walls- I just think you should be able to say, okay, the show is over and tell them to go home and do some gardening etc.

But I know what you mean too. So you abolish the monarchy and have a president instead, a semi-elected "monarch" with basically the same powers of veto and intervention, or an executive president. So you swap an elderly lady who seems to take her job quite seriously at least for Sarkozy or Berlusconi, Putin, Bush or Obama etc etc.... :rolleyes:

It is my feeling that many anti-monarchists do not hate the institution of the monarchy per se, but rather merely because they aren't the King- and afterall- it's good to be the King (if you are the King!).

I propose a biconsular system with two yearly elected consuls, a senate and the tribune of the people- ooops... they already tried that?

The whole issue is with power itself and its nature- if power is centralised and concentrated in the hands of a few, be they hereditary aristocrats, or elected persons then it will inevitably tend to autocracy of one form or another.

Abolish states.
Abolish centralised power as a result.
Abolish private property.

Or else the rest is futile.

[Demogorgon]

The religious position of the British monarch is pretty bizarre. She is head of the Church of England of course, but not the Episcopalian churches in other parts of the UK. Indeed she doesn't even need to be Episcopalian, any form of Protestantism will do, but when she is physically present in Scotland she is supposed to be Presbyterian and a member of the Church of Scotland even though it is no longer established and she has no role in it, it being a self governing semi-democratic body.

Confused yet? It gets better when you consider the actual position of the Church of England as the established Church. It doesn't have any influence over the state beyond its bishops sitting in the House of Lords and in fact it is the state that controls it. Power has been devolved to the General Synod, but big decisions still have to be confirmed by Parliament and the Prime Minister still chooses the Bishops, though he is formally advised by the Church. It gets further complicated by the fact that a Catholic or Jewish person cannot advise the Queen on Episcopal appointments and so a Catholic or Jewish Prime Minister will have to have the next most senior member of the Cabinet deliver the advise to the Queen.

Now if you want to make this even more ridiculous still, consider that the Establishment of the Church is actually pretty popular with many non-Anglicans in the establishment and particularly atheists. The way they see it, having the Church ultimately controlled by a Parliament where there is always a non Church of England majority means it can never get too big for its boots and try influencing the Government too much. And indeed to be fair, the Church of England is not as bad as the Catholic Church for trying to get involved.

The whole thing is more ridiculous than the Monarchy itself.

[Dimentio]

The tories are cutting public services across the board, including battered womens refuges, but i bet his elite social club buddies could probably raise that much capital just by moving their offshore accounts to one of the big fat cat banks here.

On the subject of Royalty, I can understand why leftists oppose them ideologically, as do I, but they hold very little power if any. To my mind the Church leaders should be the first against the wall come the Revolution!

That is idiotic and symbolical.

Just do like the Swedish Church, modernise the gospels and make Jesus into a supporter of whatever you are supporting for the moment.

The same with the monarchy.

If most people wanted to revere a pink stone or Donald Duck as the symbolical head of state, let them have it. It won't have any influence on the base of society anyway.

[Bud Struggle]

As long as the monarchy doesn't have any actualy power what is wrong with people dressing up and doing some civic duties? A morarch can and should act as a national ombudsman above politics and above partisan contention.

(As a side note--I ment your Princess Madeline in NYC a couple of years ago and I'm a BIG fan.:thumbup1:)

[ZeroNowhere]

There's already democracy in the UK.

[Demogorgon]

As long as the monarchy doesn't have any actualy power what is wrong with people dressing up and doing some civic duties? A morarch can and should act as a national ombudsman above politics and above partisan contention.

(As a side note--I ment your Princess Madeline in NYC a couple of years ago and I'm a BIG fan.:thumbup1:)

To an extent that is true of the Swedish monarchy where formal power has been removed (though the threat ofr abdication could force a Government to change its policies) but the British monarchy does retain reserve powers that could be used in an unfortunate way. The actions of John Kerr in Australia using his powers as Governer General, derived from the Queen, to dismiss the elected Prime Minister Gough Whitlam is a good example