Society/Culture The house of Windsor

[Present Not Past]

I just had a look at the countries that still support the Commonwealth - with the House of Windsor as their head.
Let's just scrap the lot of them and save ourselves a whole lot of money.
https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjvzZystJXKAhVC5aYKHa_yCDQQFggiMAI&url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Windsor&usg=AFQjCNHihvcT7c0tuQVzzBcqSWllZYoKrw&sig2=FhsvAtzAwcgGj5cUFEfpWw&bvm=bv.110151844,d.dGY

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Racist family

 

[Present Not Past]

Racist, stupid and they simply don't care that they are. They are a protected species and they know it.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Sadly we'll have to wait until the old and Queenslanders have died out.

 

[M Malice]

why does the media and large numbers of the populace fawn over the royals? pretty simple really, falls into the same category as our fascination with celebrity.
lot of stuff online, but this one of the better summaries.
http://elitedaily.com/life/generation-y-obsessed-celebrity/644403/
the fact that we as a modern society in large numbers bestow status upon a family for no other reason than their blood line is a deplorable indictment on the maturity of our society. it is a throwback to the dark ages.
http://www.surnamedna.com/?articles=y-dna-of-the-british-monarchy

 

[Sydney Bloods]

why does the media and large numbers of the populace fawn over the royals? pretty simple really, falls into the same category as our fascination with celebrity.
lot of stuff online, but this one of the better summaries.
http://elitedaily.com/life/generation-y-obsessed-celebrity/644403/
the fact that we as a modern society in large numbers bestow status upon a family for no other reason than their blood line is a deplorable indictment on the maturity of our society. it is a throwback to the dark ages.
http://www.surnamedna.com/?articles=y-dna-of-the-british-monarchy

I think it's a bit more then that, when i was living in queensland this stupid old bird at work lost her s**t because i didn't know the name of that ***** who got arrested outside the buckingham palace was.

apparently it was abhorred that i didn't know know the names of the queen's children. (legit only thought there was charles)
"how can you not know, OUR queens children" (the emphasis is not added by me BTW)

when i tried to point out the ridiculousness of her stance on the matter by asking her if she knew the children of our prime minister wa, she replied "argh tony abbott's a ******* idiot, i don't give a * about his children" i then made the worst ever bungle by explaining to her that was my entire point, the look in her eye told me it was time to simply leave the lunchroom before a 55 yr old woman attempted to stab me to death with a plastic spork.

that was the day i realised, the full on royalist don't just support royals and think it's a right old tradition, they worship the campaigners. it's like your opinion on the royals is of vital importance to something they can't quite articulate. last time had the misfortune of overhearing her ranting at 19 year old girl straight out of school for not knowing god save the queen was not only our "true" national anthem but that it was officially titled "god save our gracious queen"

this bitch was ******* mental about the royals. almost makes you wish that bloke who tried to derail the queen's train back in the 70's succeeded.

 

[M Malice]

I think it's a bit more then that, when i was living in queensland this stupid old bird at work lost her s**t because i didn't know the name of that ******** who got arrested outside the buckingham palace was.

apparently it was abhorred that i didn't know know the names of the queen's children. (legit only thought there was charles)
"how can you not know, OUR queens children" (the emphasis is not added by me BTW)

when i tried to point out the ridiculousness of her stance on the matter by asking her if she knew the children of our prime minister wa, she replied "argh tony abbott's a ******* idiot, i don't give a **** about his children" i then made the worst ever bungle by explaining to her that was my entire point, the look in her eye told me it was time to simply leave the lunchroom before a 55 yr old woman attempted to stab me to death with a plastic spork.

that was the day i realised, the full on royalist don't just support royals and think it's a right old tradition, they worship the campaigners. it's like your opinion on the royals is of vital importance to something they can't quite articulate. last time had the misfortune of overhearing her ranting at 19 year old girl straight out of school for not knowing god save the queen was not only our "true" national anthem but that it was officially titled "god save our gracious queen"

this bitch was ******* mental about the royals. almost makes you wish that bloke who tried to derail the queen's train back in the 70's succeeded.

yer. a few subjects i don't usually comment on unless i am looking for an argument/respectful debate.
1. my dislike for the institution of royalty.
2. the god existence question.
3. my complete disdain for organized religion.

4. how great the lions young talent is.

 

[Roylion]

Some of us happen to think that a system of constitutional monarchy is a superior political system.

Sixteen Commonwealth countries are constitutional monarchies and share their monarch with that of Great Britain, including Australia, New Zealand and Canada. As well as those, Andorra, Belgium (the only explicit popular monarchy), Denmark, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Bhutan, Cambodia, Japan, Thailand, Jordan, Malaysia, Morocco, Lesotho and Tonga are constitutional monarchies.

There's 44 monarchies in all, but not all of them are constitutional monarchies.

 

[The Punter]

One should be able to separate the stability our current system of government provides us with the pretty infantile interest in the daily lives of the Windsors.

They are just extremely lucky people.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Some of us happen to think that a system of constitutional monarchy is a superior political system.

It shits me when monarchists pretend the parliamentary system is exclusive to monarchies. And yes that is what you're doing.

 

[Maggie5]

I think it's a bit more then that, when i was living in queensland this stupid old bird at work lost her s**t because i didn't know the name of that ******** who got arrested outside the buckingham palace was.

apparently it was abhorred that i didn't know know the names of the queen's children. (legit only thought there was charles)
"how can you not know, OUR queens children" (the emphasis is not added by me BTW)

when i tried to point out the ridiculousness of her stance on the matter by asking her if she knew the children of our prime minister wa, she replied "argh tony abbott's a ******* idiot, i don't give a **** about his children" i then made the worst ever bungle by explaining to her that was my entire point, the look in her eye told me it was time to simply leave the lunchroom before a 55 yr old woman attempted to stab me to death with a plastic spork.

that was the day i realised, the full on royalist don't just support royals and think it's a right old tradition, they worship the campaigners. it's like your opinion on the royals is of vital importance to something they can't quite articulate. last time had the misfortune of overhearing her ranting at 19 year old girl straight out of school for not knowing god save the queen was not only our "true" national anthem but that it was officially titled "god save our gracious queen"

this bitch was ******* mental about the royals. almost makes you wish that bloke who tried to derail the queen's train back in the 70's succeeded.

Maybe ask her what she thinks of Charles and his relationship with Saudi Arabia?

I quite like the American system where the President only serves two terms.

 

[Roylion]

It shits me when monarchists pretend the parliamentary system is exclusive to monarchies.

Where did I say that?

And yes that is what you're doing.

Garbage.

I said...,"Some of us happen to think that a system of constitutional monarchy is a superior political system."

 

[M Malice]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-british-royal-family-supported-hitler-and-the-nazis/5383589
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxe-Coburg_and_Gotha

 

[Bomberboyokay]

I think it's a bit more then that, when i was living in queensland this stupid old bird at work lost her s**t because i didn't know the name of that ******** who got arrested outside the buckingham palace was.

apparently it was abhorred that i didn't know know the names of the queen's children. (legit only thought there was charles)
"how can you not know, OUR queens children" (the emphasis is not added by me BTW)

when i tried to point out the ridiculousness of her stance on the matter by asking her if she knew the children of our prime minister wa, she replied "argh tony abbott's a ******* idiot, i don't give a **** about his children" i then made the worst ever bungle by explaining to her that was my entire point, the look in her eye told me it was time to simply leave the lunchroom before a 55 yr old woman attempted to stab me to death with a plastic spork.

that was the day i realised, the full on royalist don't just support royals and think it's a right old tradition, they worship the campaigners. it's like your opinion on the royals is of vital importance to something they can't quite articulate. last time had the misfortune of overhearing her ranting at 19 year old girl straight out of school for not knowing god save the queen was not only our "true" national anthem but that it was officially titled "god save our gracious queen"

this bitch was ******* mental about the royals. almost makes you wish that bloke who tried to derail the queen's train back in the 70's succeeded.

Find an ardent monarchist in Australia and you've find somebody who considers themselves British or derivative of at their core.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

One should be able to separate the stability our current system of government provides us with

Garbage.

I said...,"Some of us happen to think that a system of constitutional monarchy is a superior political system."

Papau New Guinea has Queen Elizabeth and is genuinely one of the worst countries in the world (and unlike most of the '16 realms' has more than the population Geelong living there).

Constitutional monarchy isn't what creates stability or prosperity.

 

[Roylion]

Papau New Guinea has Queen Elizabeth and is genuinely one of the worst countries in the world (and unlike most of the '16 realms' has more than the population Geelong living there).

Yet Papua New Guinea is relatively stable politically.

Constitutional monarchy isn't what creates stability or prosperity.

You're clearly referring to economic stability / prosperity and I've never claimed that being a constitutional monarchy confers economic stability / economic prosperity. Being a republic doesn't necessarily create stability or prosperity either. The Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe, Burundi, Liberia, Eritrea amongst others are testament to that.

Most current constitutional monarchies appear to be relatively stable politically.

 

[Maggie5]

Yet Papua New Guinea is relatively stable politically.



You're clearly referring to economic stability / prosperity and I've never claimed that being a constitutional monarchy confers economic stability / economic prosperity. Being a republic doesn't necessarily create stability or prosperity either. The Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe, Burundi, Liberia, Eritrea amongst others are testament to that.

Most current constitutional monarchies appear to be relatively stable politically.

I wouldn't call PNG politically stable unless you think it is okay for corruption and removing public officials without cause is okay.

 

[The_Reaper]

Find an ardent monarchist in Australia and you've find somebody who considers themselves British or derivative of at their core.

Nope

 

[Roylion]

I wouldn't call PNG politically stable unless you think it is okay for corruption and removing public officials without cause is okay.

Since 1975 there's only been one constitutional crisis in Papua New Guinea, when the New Guinea parliament attempted to suspend the governor-general Sir Michael Ogio (and appoint Jeffrey Nape the Speaker as automatically acting governor-general) after Ogio followed a court order and recognised Michael Somare as Prime Minister, instead of the parliamentary recognised Peter O'Neill. Because the Queen had not revoked Ogio's position as her representative, the crisis was defused when parliament again recognised Ogio as Governor-General. Ogio, again recognised O'Neill as Prime Minister.

 

[Maggie5]

Since 1975 there's only been one constitutional crisis in Papua New Guinea, when the New Guinea parliament attempted to suspend the governor-general Sir Michael Ogio (and appoint Jeffrey Nape the Speaker as automatically acting governor-general) after Ogio followed a court order and recognised Michael Somare as Prime Minister, instead of the parliamentary recognised Peter O'Neill. Because the Queen had not revoked Ogio's position as her representative, the crisis was defused when parliament again recognised Ogio as Governor-General. Ogio, again recognised O'Neill as Prime Minister.

No talking of the constitution, you said, 'relatively politically stable'.
I responded only governing by corruption, fear and removing those who object. Dictatorship anyone?
Any political dissent is quickly removed from office.

 

[Roylion]

No talking of the constitution, you said, 'politically stable'.
I responded only governing by corruption, fear and removing those who object. Dictatorship anyone?
Any political dissent is quickly removed from office.

Dictatorship? New Guinea is a parliamentary democracy, as well as a constitutional monarchy. National elections occur every five years for 109 seats.
No confidence motions in the government, which used to be frequent due to the large number of political parties, now cannot occur in the first 30 months of a new government. This may have led to less accountability of the Papuan political executive, but that's a far cry from saying the country is a dictatorship. Papua New Guinea does have strong Melanesian traditions, where the credibility and popularity of a leader amongst his electorate is defined, in part, by the wealth he is able to distribute and the power he is able to wield. This has caused problems with nepotism, theft of public money and bribery, but not to the point where we can say the political system is unstable or Papua New Guinea is a dictatorship. Clearly it is not.

Incidentally Papua New Guinea's judiciary is also independent of the government. They certainly had no fear of opposing the government in 2011.

 

[Mike Smyth]

How can anyone still respect these incestuous leeches whose fortune was built on land grabs, slavery and drug trafficking. Get rid of them.

 

[Maggie5]

Dictatorship? New Guinea is a parliamentary democracy, as well as a constitutional monarchy. National elections occur every five years for 109 seats.
No confidence motions in the government, which used to be frequent due to the large number of political parties, now cannot occur in the first 30 months of a new government. This may have led to less accountability of the Papuan political executive, but that's a far cry from saying the country is a dictatorship. Papua New Guinea does have strong Melanesian traditions, where the credibility and popularity of a leader amongst his electorate is defined, in part, by the wealth he is able to distribute and the power he is able to wield. This has caused problems with nepotism, theft of public money and bribery, but not to the point where we can say the political system is unstable or Papua New Guinea is a dictatorship. Clearly it is not.

Incidentally Papua New Guinea's judiciary is also independent of the government. They certainly had no fear of opposing the government in 2011.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/286460/png-government-clarifies-eliakim-moves
http://www.radionz.co.nz/internatio...5/sacked-senior-png-cop-says-he-saw-it-coming
https://pngexposed.wordpress.com/20...tment-corruption-and-calls-for-police-action/

I suppose if the PM has sufficient funds, buying stability is not a problem.

Just think that using PNG was not a good example of democracy and where the system works as expected.

 

[Roylion]

http://www.radionz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/286460/png-government-clarifies-eliakim-moves
http://www.radionz.co.nz/internatio...5/sacked-senior-png-cop-says-he-saw-it-coming
https://pngexposed.wordpress.com/20...tment-corruption-and-calls-for-police-action/

Just think that using PNG was not a good example of democracy and where the system works as expected.

I didn't bring up PNG. My reply was in relation to another comment about PNG being a poor example of the success of constitutional monarchy bringing stability or prosperity. Regardless PNG is a parliamentary democracy headed by a Constitutional Monarchy and the political system where governments and elections are regularly held and the Constitution appears to be working reasonably well. I don't deny for a minute that PNG has internal problems with nepotism, bribery and other questionable decision making.

Still, I see little in those articles to suggest that PNG is not relatively politically stable in terms of its current system of a parlaimentary democracy headed by a constitutional monarch. The only constitutional crisis that has occurred was in 2011-2012. The Queen did not revoke the Governor-General's commission, after parliament has suspended the Governor-General, after he complied with a court decision that Michael Somare was the Prime Minister instead of the parliamentary-elected Peter Neill. As such the crisis was largely averted with parliament removing the "suspension" of the Governor-General who then re-confirmed the original parliamentary election of Prime Minister Neill.

 

[GarnerSmash]

By the Grace of God my arse.

They are a waste of time and money.