Do you like the british royal family?
i think they are useless, what you reckon?
| yeah | 19 | |
| nah | 27 |
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[
Report Post
]
Comments ( 34
)
-
McBean
They are a polite family that costs UK taxpayers millions. The speaker of the House of Lords could break a tie vote if needed. Paparazzi can take nude photos of movie stars instead.
What a waste of money.
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
donteatstuffoffthesidewalk
-
bigbudchonga
They bring in so much money tbf. They donate all money from the crown estates then just get 15% of it back. Who on earth pays a tax rate of 85%?
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
Nickvey
-
[Old Memory]
Where's the "whatever" option? Imo, they are a useless relic of monarchy, which is a shitty system that can morph into tyranny depending on whatever fool sits the throne.
But that doesn't make them bad people, so I've no reason to dislike them.
The kings were usually not the best or smartest. They were just a succession of first born sons, automatically fated to be seat warmers for a chair they didn't earn, or often, ever prove to deserve.
The power balance of democracy and the 3 branches of government proved the brilliance of America's founding fathers who left England and Britain.
America has never been ruled by an unchecked, entitled brat, thanks to leaving that pretentious and impractical royalty bullshit behind.
Comment Hidden ( show )-
-
-
[Old Memory]
Modern Western royalty, including the British monarchy, holds no real power. It's merely ceremonial. The power to pass laws and make decisions lies with Parliament, which by the way preceded the American system. Same with Japan's Emperor.
While the Mayflower's religious zealots, I mean puritans, pissed off to the New World in 1620, England already sorted out this democracy thing a few decades later, instituting the constitutional monarchy, complete with Bill of Rights (1689).
Also the current unchecked, entitled brat elected by your religious zealots disagrees with your assessment.
Do try to keep up. It's embarrassing.
Comment Hidden ( show )-
-
-
Ellenna
Yeah, that's what we all thought in Australia until 1975, when the queen's representative, the governor general, sacked a legally elected government. That's not "merely ceremonial".
And the british monarchy holds ENORMOUS power via their huge landholdings
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
Boojum
I'm American by birth, but spending most of my life abroad has significantly shifted my perceptions.
I was reminded of this last summer when one of my sisters visited. She and her husband are Southern Baptists, and when I made some passing reference to the Puritans having a lot in common with the Taliban, there were synchronised sharp intakes of breath.
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
[Old Memory]
Trump is not unchecked. He still has laws that he must obey. It's not like he could just ask for someone's head for a bullshit reason.
Comment Hidden ( show )-
-
-
[Old Memory]
True. Same thing with the Queen. She can't call for someone's head even if she wanted to, so I don't know how it can turn into tyranny when elected Parliament has the power (like all democratic countries). The US didn't exist when said head-calling was going on and England had long since abolished the horrific practice before its founding, so it's a moot point comparing the two political systems based on that.
Anyway, many people would say he is unchecked. He has to operate within legislative boundaries like any other head of state, but his decisions can run counter to that of his party and even his country if he so chooses. Actually I'd call that unhinged as well, considering that a sleazy businessman cum reality TV star cum conservative-pandering populist can hold the world hostage (North Korea, Israel/Iran, UN, China, Mexico).
The US President has more actual power than the Queen of the Commonwealth which, due to US political hegemony, he can use to wield actual tyranny. How about that.
Comment Hidden ( show )
-
-
-
-
PristinexSupreme
-
JustMolly
I can't help but wonder if you're right. There is most likely at least 1 person in the family who feels this way, not that hard to guess who either
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
EnglishLad
What, so just because the British royal family are British, they must only marry British people who have inherited a lot of wealth themselves?
Would you say the same if Prince Harry had married a Nigerian or a South Korean lady?
Take your head out of your arse for a moment!
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
Meatballsandwich
-
TheBlindInquisitor
I am lucky to not have been born in a country that is ruled by a monarchy(USA) so I don't have a opinion on them.
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
jethro
-
lordofopinions
I'm canadian and Canada has a closer tie to the royal family than Americans do. I could care less as do a lot of other Canadians. What really pissed me off is Prince Charles and what happened between him and Diana when he had a relationship with horse face Camilla before during and after his marriage to Diana. Now he is going to be king when his mother kicks the bucket. When that day comes the monarchy can go to hell. I sure as hell won't be watching his coronation.
Comment Hidden ( show )-
-
-
Boojum
I'm not a big fan of the British royal family or any form of monarchy anywhere. However, I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here.
My understanding about what happened is less than perfect, but my impression is that Charles was in love with Camilla (for some damn weird reason) long before he met Diana, but he was told firmly by HM that she was not a suitable person for him to marry. So, yes, the sainted dim-wit Diana was a victim, but so too was Charles who was forced to marry someone he didn't know well and didn't actually like all that much, and he was then expected to play the role of happy husband.
Charles is a dick in many ways, but I do have some sympathy him when it comes to the whole Diana thing. I also think she's highly overrated, and that's mainly down to the fact that she was too stupid to put on a seatbelt every time she got in a car. She was fortunate to live in a time before Twitter, Instagram, etc, so her messing around with Dodi and other entitled idiots was all kept fairly low-key, and what most people saw was the PR version of Diana.
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
VieVieDD
-
-
BleedingPain
I dont see why parlament needs them. Yes they have the final say but what else do they all do? Queen Elizabeth is a bad ass but the rest are meh
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
megadriver
I'm glad I don't live in the UK. I would find a way to not pay taxes. I hate the concept of giving someone money, just for the sake of giving them money. And why? So they can prance around in Rolls Royces, block the streets with parades and weddings and be seat warmers for expensive furniture?
They cost the UK millions in taxes every year and serve no real purpose. Even my girlfriend, who is from London, thinks the royal family is useless.
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
RaggedyandDandy
-
IrishPotato
-
nikkiclaire
-
Cuntsiclestick
-
RoseIsabella