How is it breaking news on the BBC that Meghan Markle wrote an article in the New York Times about having a miscarriage?
3 Likes
Honestly I wish I knew what everyoneâs obsession with the Royals are. Having watched the crown recently (like @Stroller forced by my wife to watch something I donât want to in the name of harmony) I despise them even more now, I get that itâs embellished etc⌠But they really are scum, all they do is fuck each other, cheat on each other, moan about how privileged they are all the whilst lving on tax payers money whilst looking down on the average person.
2 Likes
Yeah itâs why I canât see how people look at William as genuine. When youâve heard your dad wanted too be your step mums tampax while married too your mum, youâd think you may have just given Royal family a swerve.
2 Likes
Yeah exactly, and to be honest mate I donât think any of them are genuine. The monarchy are just an outdated relic.
I watched a series of all the British monarchs whilst I was away for work earlier in the year, (granted documentaries are just bitesized samples and slightly sensationalised) and there really isnât anything noble about any of them. Children fighting parents, brothers killing brothers, sister conspiring against each other, cousins killing each other, and thatâs not even going into how they basically treated the average personâs as slaves, punished people brutally for promiscuity and sexual âdeviancyâ all the whilst taken part in all of the above. Then add to that the current family isnât even really English and most of them are inbred plus all of the above then you have ask your self why should these people represent us as heads of state?
4 Likes
Iâm amazed at how many people idolise the royal family and bow and scrape to them.
People treat them as if they are better than the rest of the population and think they are well bred.
Anyone who thinks inbreeding works, then this is the family that proves it doesnât.
Throughout history they have taken land and property that wasnât theirs, murdered, stolen from the poor, tortured, changed laws on a whim to suit themselves and looked down at the rest of us.
What is their job?
Going around cutting ribbons and opening shopping centres is not hard work, neither is waving from a balcony waving at millions of âtheir subjectsâ waving back.
As for the myth that they bring in tourism, thatâs nonsense.
Tourists come to see our historic buildings and castles, they donât expect the Queen to invite them in for tea.
They are just a bunch of self promoting parasites that have a PR team ready and poised to let you know that they shop at normal shops, just like the rest of us, and very now and then theyâll wear an outfit more than once, just like the rest of us.
Whatâs to like?
5 Likes
Would like to say the same about the Swedish royal family. What a bunch of idiots! The only one who seems somewhat down to earth is the princess who will inherit the throne. She named her daughter (who is next succession) Estelle, which caused an outrage amongst former employees of the court and royalist cunt journalists. The name wasnât âroyalâ enough. Weâre talking about 2012 here, let her name her child to whatever the F she wants.
Our King Karl XVI Gustaf has had confirmed affairs with other women. He has called unemployed people lazy. The amount of scandals through the years are ridiculous. He has zero personality (that he would attract tourists is laughable). He has a car collection worth ÂŁ40million (tax payers money). The queen Silvia is of German and Brazilian descent and has lived here for 45 years, yet she still speaks awfully bad Swedish. Sheâs also gone through countless facelifts and botox procedures (guess who payed for them).
The royal familyâs ancestry is very questionable as well. We didnât have anyone to succeed the throne in 1818 (we did, but the kings nephew was a very unpopular choice). So what to do? 
Letâs import a new King! 
Whatâs even more hilarious is the fact that we chose Jean Baptiste Bernadotte, Marshall and General of France, one of Napoleons closest men 
You canât make this shit up! His wife Desiree Clary was sister-in-law to Napoleon and related to the Swedish royal family, albeit very very far back. Napoleon himself (who was anything but a royalist) even signed and approved this deal. So Bernadotte started a fake war with England to please Napoleon (but all trade with Britain remained in secrecy).
5 Likes
The best thing about the Royal Family is that they are like a foundation stone. All of the things we care about - liberty, rule of law, democracy, are protected by them. Not just in the literal sense either, but in the sense that they are a relic of history. Thatâs sometimes a plus. Hard to fuck with liberty and our traditions if our Royal Family figureheads are for our liberty, which they would be push comes to shove as itâs also their survival. Is monarchy a medieval concept. Yeah blatantly. But on balance that relationship to our history through them is worth keeping.
1 Like
Like fuck it is. No relevancy to modern day life or people they so call rule.
Plenty of countries in the world survive and prosper without one.
They play no part but visiting foreign countries as sweeteners for trade deals etc. Need fucking eradicating as soon as.
7 Likes
Just noticed your avatarâŚ
You are a Johnny Lawrence/Karate Kid fan??
1 Like
Sorry mate but I canât agree with that, the British People have fought for their rights for nearly a thousand years. The Magna Carter, The creation of the first Parliament, the civil war etc⌠much more I canât even think of the top of my head. All of these against a Tyrannical Monarchy. Theyâve been forced to accept these things, and have tried to oppose any change to lessen their power every opportunity!
We donât need them.
3 Likes
Iâd care a lot less about the Royal Family if they were self sufficient, and werenât subsidised for over ÂŁ100m a year.
1 Like
Yep, he started the Cobra Kai thread.
Karate Kid is one of my top 5 movies ever
1 Like
the story was great
1 Like
They protect it? This line of thought is completely new for me. Royal families everywhere have been fought to attain those liberties. With Louis XIVâs death as the most famous example.
Or the British royal family is an exemption on that rule.
Basically what @BizzySignal is saying lol.
3 Likes
Yes of course, but the point here is the monarchy has lost most of itâs power and and is now a constitutional monarchy, ergo the power they now protect is the constitutional bit. Out of self-interest they would protect the thing we cherish. My point was meant to be deeper than that though, my previous post I wrote pissed, so maybe wasnât very clear haha. By being figureheads loved by lots of the population - importantly here Nationalists, the monarchy functions as a really good tool for stemming the worst tendencies of nationalism. To go against liberty, rule of law, to go more fascist is to go against the Queen and what she represents. And she represents our history of things like Magna Carta even if her ancestors fought against it. She represents our myths basically and thatâs quite a good thing. Americans for example can topple a statue of say Abraham Lincoln but you canât topple the Queen. She ensures continuity of sorts and thatâs got to be good. At the very least itâs a safety net.
No itâs the thing that perpetuates the class system and worse that least trustworthy of things the establishment.
Again the majority of the world donât have a Royal family and a lot that did prosper and function easy without one.
Really donât see the logic in your argument, especially as you end it on protecting myths. One of the worst aspects of them and people in this country is the buying into this nonsense. Costs us much more than the millions we invest.
2 Likes
Myths are the stories well tell about ourselves. They are important. They translate into our sense of self, what we are and stand for.
They do function just fine. Iâm not really talking about function. Iâm talking about safety and continuity. The first European country to rid itself of Monarchy was France. It was only 200 odd years ago. not long really. It also resulted in a lot of violence.
Does the monarchy perpetuate the class system? It may have a minor role in that, I suppose. Itâs hardly essential to it.
1 Like
Thereâs no question that Queen Elizabeth has excelled in her role as our head of state, sheâs enhanced the international reputation and diplomatic standing of the UK. How you measure that in terms of pure wealth/money?
I can buy into republican arguments if there was a constitutional crisis of some kind but the key Windsors seem to understand their responsibilities.
Prince Andrew just someone who doesnât count then.
Just part of the package we have too support. There days of use and influence are done now.
1 Like
Well he doesnât hold any executive power, or perform royal duties and he isnât in the immediate line of succession.
His involvement with Epstein has no bearing operation of the Queenâs role as our HoS. If criminal conduct is found he will be subject to international prosecution.
Two former US Presidents were also known associates/acquaintances of Epstein. Prince Andrew is no different than any of the other rich elites and oligarchs who associated with him.
Seems like your issue is with billionaires, widening wealth gap and elites which all exist in republican structures, worse example being the USA. British republicanism is really a cosmetic cause at this point.
1 Like