What is your opinion on countries having royal families?
Is it antiquated?
>>58260019
yeah i think its redundant, i don't see why people care about having a royal family.
anyone who seriously argues for royalty (muh tourism muh checks and balances) can easily be refuted (some arguments are all over the places because for example the exact financing of the royalty is a bit obfuscated).
>>58260019
cuckoldry
>>58260019
I think they net you more money than they cost. Tourism is good. I think tradition is important. The queen also seems like a good person. Overall I have no problem with them as long as they don't have much political power.
>>58260019
something is off in this pic
>>58260019
my opinion is GOD SAVE OUR GRACIOUS QUEEN
>>58260078
>I hate my country's history
>I hate my culture
>I hate the homage to how our country was run for hundreds of years
Or you're just a Mehmet.
>>58260221
see in your case your monarch is literally the descendent of some random french guy who got invited to rule.
>culture
the monarchy has almost no impact on the culture of 99% of the population
>homage to how our country was run
hysterisis is a stupid argument, just because things were done in the past doesn't mean they should be done in the present.
Republics are even more antiquated so I never understood that argument against Monarchy
I never understood them. Is the current Queen of England a descent of the original King of England?
>>58260019
On one hand a royal family gives you a sense of a nation's history that's different from a book or a building or an artifact. It's real people.
On the other hand guys who make threads about royal family are virgins who'll probably never have a family so their priority is kinda fucked up.
>>58260303
Except both Rome and Athens started as kingdoms.
>>58260319
m8
it's european royalty
everyone is a descendant of everyone
>>58260319
Probably, all european nobility are related to each other.
>>58260355
Their republics are both much older than the monarchy on these islands
>>58260355
They all reverted to monarchy too.
Our king looks like Kevin Bacon
>tfw republic
>tfw the king is not a king
>>58260319
Yeah Great (x22) granddaughter of William the Conquerer (Frenchie who conquered England in 1066).
Of course before 1066 we had Kings of England but they were
1. Scandinavian (gross)
2. Only ruled for about 10 years a piece because that's what the first millenium was like
3. Less and less is known about them (obviously).
Prior to 1066 you had great kings like Alfred, Cnut, Aethelstan - but 1066 is seen as the "new era" of the monarchy.
>lol I am the ruler because my father said god gib power to rule you fucking plebs.
>btw gib moniz you stupid peasants
>>58260389
Fair enough.
>>58260411
There were kings of Anglo-Saxon descent AFTER the Norman conquest too. The Normans married into the Anglo-Saxon line.
>>58260451
Normans are niggers.
Once you get Norman'd you're a Norman.
>>58260416
As opposed to poilitics switching on 4 year cycles while eternally blaming other previous governments for fucking up.
>>58260451
>There were kings of Anglo-Saxon descent AFTER the Norman conquest too
Nah they don't count. The real Anglo-Saxon nobility disappeared in Scandinavia and Varangian service.
>>58260511
But we have both.
>>58260401
Why doesn't San Marino have a monarchy?
I thought it was tradition for small irrelevant countries to have monarchies.
>Andorra
>Liechtenstein
>Monaco
>Luxembourg
>Vatican (The pope counts as one imo)
San Marino is the only tiny irrelevant country in Europe that doesn't.
Cuck shit I mean come on it's 2016
>>58260416
We need a Head of State. The taxpayer pays for the Head of State and the various old buildings regardless of whether it's a Monarch or a President.
British people prefer having the country represented by this family with historical links to the past rather than some politician in a figurehead role.
This is somehow bad.
Explain?
>>58260544
You wouldn't if you were a real monarchy.
>>58260416
Would you say something so cruel even to a little princess? ;_;
>>58260582
No idea
>>58260596
>British people prefer
don't put it like this, we didn't elect on it.
And why should a president have to be a politician? Surely anyone can fill the ceremonious role.
The argument comes that instead using people who are of some outstanding quality to represent us, we use people who just happened to be born into a certain family
>>58260640
t. Alberto Barbosa, Caliph of the Iberia Peninsula
>>58260411
>Yeah Great (x22) granddaughter of William the Conquerer
How certain is this? 1 out of 10 brits have fathers who aren't their biological parents.
>>58260596
Don't think she's the best person to be representing us desu.
I know I'll sound like Tumblr when I say this but she was responsible for us raping and killing a lot of other countries' people.
I don't see her as exacerbating relations with foreign powers but she's hardly a panacea to them either.
Also Philip can't go to a country without insulting everyone who lives there - which is so funny it's probably actually the best argument against republicanism that there is.
>>58260702
and 9 out of 10 americans raise children who aren't biologically theirs
>>58260656
>don't put it like this, we didn't elect on it.
>elect on it
Are you even British?
Anyway, I WILL put it like that, because the British people DO want a Monarchy. Public opinion is very clear on that. See pic.
>And why should a president have to be a politician? Surely anyone can fill the ceremonious role.
They would have to be voted in. Politics becomes involved on some level whenever people are elected to anything. Also, can you imagine anyone being elected with margins so large as the Queen's popularity in polls? And even if you did end up with someone that popular, there will still be plenty of people who voted for someone else.
The idea that putting it to a vote means everyone will be happy with the outcome and we get a more representative person is ridiculous
>>58260702
It's funny you say that lad - because a King called Henry VI is very highly rumoured to have been cucked and "Edward IV" was supposed to be a bastard by some peasant archer that fucked the queen.
If this was correct then the REAL king should be this guy callled Simon Abney Hastings who lives in Australia now (who is just some normal guy). This line of succession obviously relies in the closest male relative other than Edward IV being made King.
But Edward IV was made King and the Queen descended from him - bastard or not.
>>58260735
No cuck, there was some news article awhile back about an English king whose grave was found somewhere. Maybe it was aa parking lot or something. They ran some genetic tests and it turned out none of the current royals had any relation to him.
>>58260808
>an opinion poll of 1000 people
>an election
>Are you even British
yeah and I also believe in British values such as democracy or those espoused by John Locke.
>The idea that putting it to a vote means everyone will be happy with the outcome and we get a more representative person is ridiculous
ok calm down de Maistre we clearly have different conceptions of how the world works
>>58260915
I believe in democracy as well. The point of democracy is to hold GOVERNMENT to account. Not as a tool for deciding everything. There are many areas of decision-making that are totally unsuited for democracy.
The tyranny of the majority does not always have the best answers. It's a very powerful tool, it should be used for the most important job which is holding government to account. The monarch does not control government thank goodness.
>>58261075
>The tyranny of the majority
bad meme
>>58261075
yes clearly someone being put into a position solely because of the family they were born into is better than a system that attempts to recognise them on their merits.
gee the tyranny of the majority works for arming people with the power to levy laws, and wage wars, but its a bit risky putting in place for a person who literally just has to shake hands and sign documents.
>>58261101
Fuck off.
Do you have any idea about the class/regional/wealth divides in the UK? I can easily see a situation where 55% of the country votes for a British President with obvious links to the left-wing, urban, progressive traditions and another 40% votes for someone closer to the Tory shires and rural traditions.
Then you have the entire UK represented by someone who a large part of the country part stand, who only represents specific parts of the country.
That would be awful. And the Head of State would be politicised. They could, if they wanted, make comments about government because of their democratic mandate. It happens in other Parliamentary Republics.
The great thing about the Monarch is that ALL sections of society are satisfied with it, apart from small minorities
>>58261242
>who a large part of the country part stand
can't* stand
>>58261242
I don't see why the president has to be left or right wing? Surely it can just be a famous scientist and then a famous entrepeneur.
Its just a ceremonial post, who cares?
>>58261101
>I believe in democracy
Uncontacted tribes in Brazil are living more meaningful lives than this cuck >>58261242
>>58261191
>than a system that attempts to recognise them on their merits.
A national vote does NOT recognise people on their "merits". It recognises them on how popular they are with a majority, potentially a small majority, of the voting public.
>gee the tyranny of the majority works for arming people with the power to levy laws, and wage wars
It doesn't you idiot. We don't use a single nationwide vote to elect the government. There are 650 separate local elections to choose MPs, and then the government is led by the PM who can command a majority in the Commons. NOT a majority of votes in the UK.
>>58261332
>A national vote does NOT recognise people on their "merits". It recognises them on how popular they are with a majority, potentially a small majority, of the voting public.
yeah but since its just a personality contest, surely people would pick the most meritous people.
also i'm not sure how the second thing negates my critique of your critique
>>58261298
>I don't see why the president has to be left or right wing? Surely it can just be a famous scientist and then a famous entrepeneur.
Holy shit. Well of course it could be a famous scientist, if everyone thought like you! But that's not the case is it? You want to give this to a nationwide *popularity* vote. The person who gets elected is the one who appeals to the majority, or the plurality if there's no one that popular.
What is the most popular newspaper in the UK. Who are the most popular celebrities. What is the most popular music.
There are your "merits", enjoy them
>>58261439
>merits
that's fine, at least they've done SOMETHING to earn the popularity of people, besides simply being born into a family and refraining from doing anything publically besides showing face.
>The person who gets elected is the one who appeals to the majority
yes that is the point
>Who are the most popular celebrities. What is the most popular music
Is this an argument?
>>58261432
>yeah but since its just a personality contest, surely people would pick the most meritous people.
I don't see how this follows. What is your definition of meritorious?
>also i'm not sure how the second thing negates my critique of your critique
Basically a single UK-wide vote is very different to a how a government is elected, which is First Past The Post in 650 different constituencies.
>>58261480
>at least they've done SOMETHING to earn the popularity of people,
What if the thing they've done to earn the popularity of SOME people also alienates many others, but is enough to win the plurality?
> besides simply being born into a family and refraining from doing anything publically besides showing face.
There are plenty of popular celebrities who have just been born into a amazing wealth and had easy lives not doing that much
>Is this an argument?
Yes, it is when you bring out the "famous scientist" stuff.
Modern royals are like religious figures, there is no reason not to have them
If not nationalism then at least they can be an alternative voice of the gentry. They represent a class of society that never went away anywhere despite republican egality, Better have a recognizable face than various conspiracy theories.
>>58261390
Sweden might be up for having a tranny princess
It's alright if the monarch is actually from a dynasty that "created" the country and played a part in it's history, like for example the Hohenzollerns of Prussia/Germany and the Habsburgs of Austria
But when countries like Sweden who just picked the worst Marshal of France Napoleon gave them as their king, i can't support that.
In fact what I said about the election of a government in >>58261593 is still not right. I'm being sloppy.
Governments are not elected in the UK. We elect our local MPs, and the government is appointed FROM those MPs by the party/coalition that commands a majority in the Commons.
This bloke would be our Kaiser if we still had a monarchy. He doesn´t really give two strockes of a dead dogs cock about monarchy, since he has said in several interviews that he certain lives a happier life as a citicen than his forefathers as monarchs.
>>58260019
how old is your queen again?
>>58262328
The girl on the left would be the heir for the Austrian throne
>>58260411
Based Alfred.
>>58260019
We have close to a 50% chance of voting in a pack of retards every election. I'm quite happy with the fact that there's a link to a family with a reasonable record to step in just in case we vote in retards and they catastrophically fuck up.
Even if they abolished all official ties with the British monarchy it would still exist because of its massive fanbase. It's literally undefeatable
>>58261298
And what famous scientists are currently the heads of state anywhere on earth?
It's not purely a ceremonial post in a lot of countries. The president ends up influencing the prime minster and government, far more than a monarch does.
>>58263787
this
Republicans babbies hope for their commie revolution, but good luck taking on the military without any arms, becasue you've all voted yourselves into the disarmament of firearms.
JUST CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP
