The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #321  
Old 11-11-2017, 05:50 PM
Frozen Royalist's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Raleigh, United States
Posts: 94
You know about British republicans, they complain about money and democracy with a passion and I can't help but wonder if this is what they think their purpose in life is just to complain about stuff that isn't really broken or stuff that is not really all that related to the "firm". I mean do republicans ever have anything better to do because they just seem the kind of people that act like jerks and just watch for a poor ill child to trip and have a bad day while they just sit back and eat popcorn while having grins on their faces that make you just want to have MI6 target these guys or something. Also I can't help but think the detractors are trolls, I mean really "throw them in jail" "give us our money you parasites" "Chaz isn't fit to become king" "Vive la idiotic and pointless revolution" "I want to take a $#%@ down the Queen's throat" or "We should've done what the French and the Russians had done". If you like republics so much just move to one like France or America, you guys tend to be friends with globalists and SJWs anyway so you ought to support freedom of going wherever you want at the possible expense of others depending on how you act. There is not size that fits all people (the Republicans and especially you Graham Smith and Jeremy Corbyn) so go to a pub and call it a lifetime.

-Frozen Royalist

P.S. Another thing to the republicans, if you are complaining about money just learn new skills to get better jobs or maybe even work harder at the ones you have so you might make even more pounds I mean I can't help but think the republicans are lazy or something. Also if you are complaining about democracy might I remind you that you could run for parliament and become a prime minister maybe, the Queen doesn't have that much power and she could not have stopped Brexit or a second Scottish Independence Referendum so good luck with your arguments there.

Also to all British republicans, if you don't like any of us why don't you form a line behind us and we'll get this show on the road I mean we are getting sick of your asinine comments and your protests. So. Just. Stop. Already. You aren't going to get your referendum this year or the next or the one after that. Although I am sceptical of Corbyn he said he won'f fight for your cause so you won't get your referendum. Also to Graham Smith of the republic, GET A LIFE.

-Frozen Royalist

P.S. Think you for your time
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #322  
Old 11-15-2017, 11:02 PM
Frozen Royalist's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Raleigh, United States
Posts: 94
My apologies for the tone in the previous post it's just that republicans make me want to smash my laptop, which I have been using to write these posts. It's just that I understand these institutions (the monarchies) are thousands of years old and hereditary, which die hard republicans don't like but I think they are crying over thousands and thousands of year old milk at this point. Heck the republicans are just about as old as well so saying that monarchies are outdated is rather hypocritical in my opinion. What makes a republic "modern"? What makes republicans so sure that Britain could be richer, presidents aren't exactly cheap and they'd have to pay for the referendum along with the costs of renaming institutions, putting new faces on the pound (unless they want Britain to part of the Euro and part of the European Union again). They have to go through the process of dividing the Royal House's wealth (which they haven't earned) accordingly to whatever manner they deem fit, establish new organizations and awards to replace the ones that were associated with the royal family, establish new flags and coat of arms for the nation (essentially removing the crown from some flags possibly to outright making new flags entirely) and let's face it all of that is going to require referendums in their own right which will cost money. They would have to force citizens in the former kingdom to relinquish their aristocratic or knighthood tittles along with awards which I'm sure they might now like. They'd have to take down statues and probably replace them with either nobodies or the main orchestrators of the referendum, who'd like a statue of Graham Smith and Jeremy Corbyn? And there are many and I mean many more things to straighten out and loose ends to take care of (if the UK actually has a referendum on the monarchy and becomes a republic first before the rest of the Commonwealth Realm has referendums). So in the end, I have this to ask the republicans. Why? I mean do you guys just want to replace the monarchy for the sake of replacing something that is old? Do you guys just want more money? Do you guys just not like the idea of head of states and their families being "associated" with incidents like the paradise papers or just being famous in general, I mean what is the problem with you guys?

-Frozen Royalist

P.S. I'm honestly getting tired of reading articles about monarchism on the Guardian, the Telegraph, and Readit because I have seen some of the nastiest comments ever when it comes to monarchism. I need to talk myself into stop reading those damned comment sections along with the pro-republican articles themselves, they just give me bad headaches in the end.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #323  
Old 11-24-2017, 12:36 PM
Frozen Royalist's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Raleigh, United States
Posts: 94
Wow, did I scare people away with my rants, sorry guys.

-Frozen Royalist

P.S. IMO I think support is probably returning to normal levels since the whole "paradise papers" thing is now mainly focused on the other elite rather than the Her Majesty, honestly though would it hurt for people to do proper research.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #324  
Old 11-24-2017, 12:50 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,955
Not to worry one little bit. Expressing opinions is what gets good conversations going around here.
__________________
To finish the moment, to find the journey's end in every step of the road, to live the greatest numbers of good hours, is wisdom.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #325  
Old 11-24-2017, 01:25 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 476
Sorry to cite the Daily Mail, but I am reminded of an interesting article from a few days ago regarding how much the British Monarchy contributes to Britain's economy. Republicans in the UK should take note of this:
The Royal Family contributes £1.8bn to Britain's economy | Daily Mail Online

It is really a nice positive article about the British Monarcy, not something I often say about the Daily Mail.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #326  
Old 11-24-2017, 02:10 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,155
The DF is for all their stupidity, a pretty pro-monarchy newspaper, and there are often positive articles on the monarchy (especially the Queen). But the majority of their ignorant columnists isn't that keen on the younger royals:
Janet Street-Porter on the Queen's marriage | Daily Mail Online
Quote:
Sadly, the younger members of the Royal family, with their radio appearances, charity events and naff baby pictures are fast downgrading the Monarchy to just another app on our phones.

All the talk from Harry and William of ‘modernising’ the monarchy and ‘making it accessible’, spells the end of the Royal business, run so brilliantly by their clever Grandmother.
I agree with the above quote when it comes to Harry, but as one said it on twitter the other day, William is (fortunately) much more like the Queen.

And before someone accuses me of hating Harry again:

1. No I'm not hating Harry.

2. But he still doesn't think before he speak.

3. We saw that in his conversation with Mellody Hobson at the Obama Foundation, when he said some things which could have been taken (by the media, if they had paid attention to the interview) as insults towards other royal family members.

4. And can some of his advisers please tell him to stop talking about ''modernising the monarchy'' while the Queen is alive. It is rude of him, and it's really starting to piss me of.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #327  
Old 11-24-2017, 02:18 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,955
Don't ask me why but, to me, the term "modernizing the monarchy" sounds like an oxymoron. For an institution that is very much based in tradition and keeping the past alive by symbolizing continuity, modernization or "fixin' what ain't broke" doesn't seem to fit.
__________________
To finish the moment, to find the journey's end in every step of the road, to live the greatest numbers of good hours, is wisdom.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #328  
Old 11-24-2017, 03:03 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,790
AMEN, Osipi. It IS an oymoron, as well as a dire error.

I remember in the 70s there was much envious comparison with the 'Bicycling Monarchies' [the Netherlands, principally] held to be far more 'democratic' than the 'stuffy' Windsors.
Now Maxima glams it up, FAR more than any Windsor and her compatriots 'lap it up'...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #329  
Old 11-24-2017, 03:16 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 476
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY View Post
The DF is for all their stupidity, a pretty pro-monarchy newspaper, and there are often positive articles on the monarchy (especially the Queen). But the majority of their ignorant columnists isn't that keen on the younger royals:
Janet Street-Porter on the Queen's marriage | Daily Mail Online

I agree with the above quote when it comes to Harry, but as one said it on twitter the other day, William is (fortunately) much more like the Queen.

And before someone accuses me of hating Harry again:

1. No I'm not hating Harry.

2. But he still doesn't think before he speak.

3. We saw that in his conversation with Mellody Hobson at the Obama Foundation, when he said some things which could have been taken (by the media, if they had paid attention to the interview) as insults towards other royal family members.

4. And can some of his advisers please tell him to stop talking about ''modernising the monarchy'' while the Queen is alive. It is rude of him, and it's really starting to piss me of.
I agree with your statements. I have felt it rude of him to speak of modernizing while the Queen is still alive. Furthermore, the monarchy seems to be doing quite well like it is. I like Harry, too, but he can be a loose cannon. Besides, it really isn't up to him to "modernize". Charles is the next Monarch and he seems traditional to a large degree. Also, is there somewhere that I can read about this conversation to find out what he said?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #330  
Old 11-24-2017, 03:47 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 5,011


Here we are. Absorb shocking Harry, the man who singlehandedly according to some is about to bring the British monarchy to its knees! It's an innocuous conversation by the way when you really listen to him.

Just like to mention, in the latest poll taken Harry was the most popular member of the BRF voted by the British public at 74%. Strange for a man forever being accused of being a loose cannon and putting his foot in it etc!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #331  
Old 11-24-2017, 03:51 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,645
I think the monarchy always has to tread a careful line between being too modern (and in that way I agree with some of the comments of Janet Street-Porter) but likewise also not too old and stuffy and aloof.
The Queen was - let's not forget - behind some major changes to modernise the monarchy. She got rid of debutantes being 'presented' for example but part of the monarchy endurance its its stark difference from "celebrity" something which some of the next generations of royals seem not to understand.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #332  
Old 11-24-2017, 05:33 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Here we are. Absorb shocking Harry, the man who singlehandedly according to some is about to bring the British monarchy to its knees! It's an innocuous conversation by the way when you really listen to him.

Just like to mention, in the latest poll taken Harry was the most popular member of the BRF voted by the British public at 74%. Strange for a man forever being accused of being a loose cannon and putting his foot in it etc!
Curryong, Why do you always react so strongly when people (including me) say something about Harry or Diana? And why do you always say (when it comes to Harry or Diana) that people have said things they have not said?

I have to accept that the Diana fans (go against facts) and praises her like she was goddess, and you have to accept people like me who don't like her. The same goes for Harry (a person I do like BTW).

And some facts:

1. Have I said that Harry is bringing the British monarchy to its knees? No, I haven't.

2. Is Harry a losse cannon? Yes (in my opinion) he is.

3. And was that Opinium Research poll you refers to, about popularity? No, it was not.

4. What was that poll about? It was about approval ratings.

5. And as you know, Opinium Research always have the Queen's approval ratings and the support for the monarchy lower than others polls, and Her Majesty's numbers was down due to the ''Paradise Papers'' thing.

6. Her Ipsos MORI ratings (above 80%, sometimes 90%), YouGov ratings (above 80%) and ICM ratings (above 70%) are the highest in the family. And a CNN poll from January 2017 shoved that the Queen was the person with the highest approval rating in the US with 79%, Pope Francis came second with 66%.

BTW, I agree with what tommy100 said.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #333  
Old 11-24-2017, 05:48 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 5,011
I wasn't attacking the Queen or her approval ratings. I merely pointed out that Harry had 74% in that poll, which he did. And that is worth acknowledging isn't it?

I must take you at your word that you like Harry. However, it would be nice, if you do, if a bit of praise rather than regular criticism of him in a great many posts, came his way sometimes (when praise is warranted.)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #334  
Old 11-24-2017, 06:34 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,155
As I've said to you in the ''General News for Prince Harry'' thread this summer, I don't follow him that much.

But if Harry stops saying the things which I think are inculting to the Queen and damaging to the monarchy, then I will of course stop my criticism (and I don't think I have said anything negative about him since those interviews in the summer).

BTW, thanks for an interesting discussion!
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #335  
Old 11-24-2017, 06:39 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 5,011
And Thank you ROYAL NORWAY! I think. Only joking!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #336  
Old 11-25-2017, 03:24 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 786
Just a note that having president is not necessarily the same as having a very political president. Some countries, for example Germany and Israel, expect their president to be 'above politics' (even though they are a party member of a political party). So, their function is far more like a constitutional monarch (but with a term limit, etc) while the executive power lies with the prime minister (or equivalent).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #337  
Old 11-25-2017, 04:32 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,155
A response to those discussing the popularity of the British monarchy:

The British Monarchy:Republicanism in the UK remains very low, with figures rarely exceeding 20% in support of a British republic, some polls have it as low 13%, and consistent 70/80% support (in most polls) for the continuation of the Monarchy (some polls have shown record-high support at 82% and 86% since 2012). So it's going nowhere, and I actually think it is the safest Monarchy in the world.

To abolish the British monarchy will also be very difficult.
1: Most polls must show a majority for a republic, this is very very unlikely.
2: Majority in the house of commons for a referendum, this is not going to happen as long as the polls show that a majority supports the monarchy.
3: Majority in the referendum for a republic, this is not going to happen while I'm alive (and I'm only 29).
4: Changing the country's name, changing the pound, remove the royal name from all state institutions. These are just some of the things that must be changed.
5: All of this is going to cost so much money that even many Republicans will start doubting it.
6: And the vast majority of the british population will never vote to replace a constitutional monarchy with a divisive politician or a celebrity.

Polls: The British monarchy is also that european monarchy with the highest support.

Yes, some of the polls in Denmark show the support at above 80%, but these are polls that don't give people the opportunity to awnser ''don't know/no opinion''. The Danish polls who ask the question as the Brits/Norwegians does, show the suport at around 70% (even seen some in the 50s% and 60s%).

That was also the case in the Netherlands where the TNS NIPO polls were in the 80s% (some in the 90s%). The Maurice de Hond, Synovate and Ipsos polls (which includes the ''don't know/no opinion'' questions) have the support in the 70%s and 60%s (one poll in 2015 at 50%).

About political systems: Why do I prefer an apolitical head of state with a parliamentary system and a prime minister, like we have in the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, the Netherlands, Germany, Ireland and Austria etc?

1. Yes, we have our problems in those countries as well, but most of these heads of state (especially constitutional monarchs, but also presidents) are unifying and may have approval ratings at 80/90%.

2. A political head of government is always going to be divisive and almost always have approval ratings below 50%, and should therefore not be the head of state.

Why do I prefer Constitutional Monarchy (with that I mean the European model)?

1. Because I think it's the best political system one can have, and it is (IMO) good for democracy. Why? Because a constitutional monarch don't have the ability to intervene/interfere as an apolitical president may have (yes, some European constitutional monarchs may have that power on paper, but not in reality, and won't use it anyway). And an apolitical president has to be elected (either by the people or the parliament) and that can quickly turn into a divisive, political and (yes) crazy thing.

2. And look at the popularity of some of the monarchs:

QEII: Beloved, admired and extremely popular with approval ratings others only can dream about.

King Harald V: Beloved, admired and extremely popular with approval ratings others only can dream about.

QMII: Very respected with good approval ratings. Even she has (during the past two years) turned into what I will call popular.


And to Iluvbertie's post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I was a monarchist when I joined this board mind you but it is the information here that turned me into a republican as I realised the full extent of the corruption and misuse of position that the BRF use e.g. William using a loophole to get into the RAF as a pilot when he couldn't get there with his eyesight. As a future king he should be above reproach but he isn't, the constant whinging by the two princes about how hard they have things, the Queen and Charles using off-shore accounts to avoid tax (again it may be legal but as the monarch and heir they also have to be totally above reproach and they aren't). I won't even go into the adultery from so many of the family (trying hard to find any of them who haven't had affairs or cheated on their partners).

UK republicans - like those here in Australia - believe we should have a say in our Head of State which we don't have.
''Corruption''? That is an outrageous thing to claim (and does not consist with facts).

''Queen and Charles using off-shore accounts to avoid tax''? That is an completely wrong thing to say (and does not consist with facts or reality).
1. As you very well known, It was not The Queen's personal fortune.

2. It was the Duchy of Lancaster who provides the Queen with an income. The Duchy is (as you know) administered by it's Chancellor (an MP chosen by the PM) and the Duchy Council (chosen by the Chancellor).

3. She has voluntarily paid both income/capital gains tax since 1993 (when she in reality was forced by a then anti-monarchy press to do so).

4. The income she receives from the Duchy of Lancaster goes to the Privy Purse (the monarchs private income), most of those money is used to fund official/private expenses of other Royal Family members.

''UK republicans - like those here in Australia - believe we should have a say in our Head of State which we don't have''? No most of them don't. Most of them is just angry because they think the Sovereign Grant is personal money given to the Queen.

What I think about UK republicans: I adore the Queen and I am a great admirer of Charles and a big fan of William and Kate. I am also (like 70/80% of the UK population) a big supporter of our constitutional monarchy, but I respect those who think it's wrong to have an unelected head of state.

What I don't respect is lying manipulating ignorant bullies sush as Graham Smith, Kevin Mcguire and Stig Abell or crazy psychopaths such as Russell Brand or the thugs in Daily Fail comment section. They (the DF trolls) are (as i says all the time on these threads) a bunch of racist, sexist, homophobic, ignorant, sick, spiteful bullies who hates everyone. And they represents a very tiny minority of the UK public, and many of them are from other countries.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #338  
Old 11-25-2017, 04:46 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 908

Oh what a *Beautifully well said* comment Royal Norway........you said it so much better then I ever could.....so agree about all those that have hate in their hearts and souls for the BRF and mostly for HM.....whom I pray is around another decade like her mom was.....
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #339  
Old 11-26-2017, 04:18 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk/Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 6,081
Please note that a number of posts debating the monarchy/republics have been moved to the http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...lic-12736.html thread.
Let's stay on topic and away from politics.
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #340  
Old 11-26-2017, 06:42 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,629
When Harry met Meghan (the names alone...) the fine thin invisible but so important line between royalty and celebrity has been completely blurred. Now I can easily see Harry acting the cool dude on Graham Norton's sofa and we have all seen his actress' wife on television.

Call me oldfashioned but I preferred The Prince Henry to come home with a more traditional friend because in the end all this will erode the monarchy from within. In the past it was fairly simple what the royal family was: the King's family and he "demanded" his issue to marry according rank and status, all to keep the royal dignity and the prestige of the House. But when a vulgar loudmouth as Sarah Ferguson, a rugby international as Mike Tindall or an actress like Meghan Markle become the new standard for the royal family, then sooner or later a point is reached that the core existence of having a Royal Family is under threat.

If we want to have "commoners" flooding the palace, what about the idea of democratically electing our very own "commoner" to be our Head of State?

This counts for almost all royal families in Europe. From the unwed mom of a son engaging into marriage with the future King (Norway), from the future Queen falling in love with her fitness trainer (Sweden), from the King of the Netherlands thinking that his private feelings for the daughter of a questionable individual was more important than considerations regarding his Royal House, or even the King of Spain having his eyes glued to the TV screen when that goodlooking presenter reads the news again. All nice variations on Cinderella but in the longer terms it is eroding and damaging for what a royal family actually means.

Anyway, I have given up all. The royals themselves seems not to care. Prince Henry of Wales, eh..., "Harry" has seen Meghan and he must and shall have her. More and more I see royal ladies parading around bedecked in historic jewels, hanged with distinghuised Orders and I think: "Girl... you PLAY a Princess. You are no Princess at all!" And deep in all our hearts we know this. We see the tattooed underwear model "Princess" Sofia in all her finery, of that Argentine girl sparkling with priceless gems made for Hannovers, Hohenzollerns, Romanovs or Stuarts (she should not even have been allowed to touch it!), we see a swimmer hapless trying to find her role, visibly trapped in a fairytale at the Mediterrean. It is all becoming a vaudeville. I will not be surprised in the least to see thrones collapsing. To begin in Sweden or the Netherlands and then in a domino wave all over Europe. And the fine thing is: no communists or anarchists in sight. They all did it themselves!
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill coel hen crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events denmark duchess of cambridge cocktail dresses duchess of cambridge eveningwear earl of snowdon family general news gloucester hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hereditary princess sophie infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia italy iñaki iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy morgan news prince prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince jean prince liam prince nicholas prince oscar prince sebastian princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary casual style princess of asturias princess sofia princess sofia style princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia eveningwear queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathildes hats queen maxima queen silvia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:24 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises