RE: For Our British Friends

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: For Our British Friends

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: For Our British Friends

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: For Our British Friends - 4/17/2007 10:53:01 AM

seeksfemslave

Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline

I wouldn't deny that the Royal connection may be used as a selling point for tourism but I think the Royals' existence is an anachronism through which the UK should have passed by now.

Its a sad reflection on the state of things in my opinion. I mean our so called booming economy. I notice alarm bells are starting to ring on that front. Inflation is "out of spec" and rising interest rates are expected to cause misery to large numbers of those already stretched to financial breaking point.
Still I expect the 17 year old girl I saw this very day, with a 2 year old son and heavily pregnant should be OK.

I always wish that Oliver Cromwell had lived a bit longer.

The point made about social mobility: I doubt it is any more common in the US than it is in the UK. It just doesn't happen much anywhere IMO. One of my arguements against multiculturalism !

Cant cram in any more horses that I like to flog. lol

< Message edited by seeksfemslave -- 4/17/2007 10:55:03 AM >

(in reply to darkinshadows)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: For Our British Friends - 4/17/2007 11:02:14 AM

Sinergy

Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

I was curious about something when it comes to our friends from the UK, are any of you "royal watchers"? Do you care about the queen or her children or her grandchildren? Do you support having a monarchy, or do you wish to end it? How popular is the Royal Family with your fellow countrymen/women?

In all the conversations that I have seen about the differences between our side of the pond and yours, I think this is one thing we have never fleshed out or talked about. From few of the people I know that post here from the UK, I think I can guess how many will respond to this thread, and I will be curious to see if I am right.

Mike Myers had this to say about the British Monarchy and their evil entanglement in the Pentavirate.

"A group of the wealthiest people in the world, who own all the newspapers and control absolutely everything"

Anthony LaPaglia "Who is in this Pentavirate."

Mike Myers "The Queen, the Gettys, The Rothchilds, and Colonel Sanders before he went teats up."

[smartass]

Keep your precious monarchy, but we here in the States are arming up to prevent you Royalists from invading again.

[/smartass]

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: For Our British Friends - 4/17/2007 12:44:28 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger

quote:

30% are royalists

Gent, Seeks, Meatcleaver, Missturbation, LE.....

I'm curious..... Who makes up the thirty percent? Are they working class, professionals or crony-government types? Or maybe you can't break it down like that?

I guess what I'm really asking surrounds the mentality to lower yourself beneath someone who is seemingly very average, but just happened to be born at the right place/time?

- R

UR, my observation is they have support across the class spectrum to varying degrees:

1) I would be very surprised if the majority are not the middle classes from Southern England. I get the impression that class in England and the US have different connotations, class to me signifies a value system rather than income. Anyway, the middle classes in England tend to be conservatives and the monarchy is a very conservative institution, thus they are predisposed to supporting the monarchy.
2) The older generation of the working classes were royalist, they didn't have the education to see they were part of an establishment keeping them down, but my generation of working class are certainly not royalists. I'd be very surprised if there was a significant amount of the working classes who supported the monarchy, particularly in Northern England where we have a tradition of anti-monarchy sentiment, trade unionism, socialism, Labour Party.
3) The establishment still back them, because they tend to see the monarchy as wrapped up in empire and they take personal satisfaction from the conquest of those days.

I honestly don't think it's an issue of people lowering themselves beneath them. For a significant amount of Britons, they take personal satisfaction in the monarchy because they're a symbol of domination (abroad). It may sound strange, but that's my hunch. Frankly though, I think most people don't care, it's almost a case of out of sight out of mind. Personally, I think it's a barrier to progress. There was a lot of talk a few years ago that when the present incumbent goes, then that's it, but some how I can't see it. Even if she does, this country will just replace the monarchy with a celebrity and his/her family, start another bloodline and pay homage.

It's hard to put your finger on just why they are still around, but I think it's a sign of a conservative nation and also of a nation looking to the past for the answers to the future, a sort of clinging to days gone by rather than face the fact that in terms of conquest, the "best" days have gone.

UR, we still have a second house made up of bishops, heriditary peers and appointed lords, and these people have the power to block legislation. Hilarious ain't it :-) Britain is a very different place to the US. You started with a reasonably level playing field, and I can understand why you want to conserve that. We have had to fight tooth and nail to even get some sort of representation, and they'd take that away if they had the chance.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to UtopianRanger)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: For Our British Friends - 4/17/2007 12:56:34 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

Keep your precious monarchy, but we here in the States are arming up to prevent you Royalists from invading again.

Sinergy

I wouldn't worry too much Sinergy, our cardboard tanks aren't about to do much damage. The best we can hope for is for our army to travel over on a yacht, land on the coast at night, take a few hostages, bring them back to England and sell them back to you for a few quid. We've got to stop this army bollocks, we're a small country off North West Europe in the 21st century - time to relax, I reckon.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to Sinergy)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: For Our British Friends - 4/17/2007 5:22:25 PM

Sinergy

Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

Keep your precious monarchy, but we here in the States are arming up to prevent you Royalists from invading again.

Sinergy

I wouldn't worry too much Sinergy, our cardboard tanks aren't about to do much damage. The best we can hope for is for our army to travel over on a yacht, land on the coast at night, take a few hostages, bring them back to England and sell them back to you for a few quid. We've got to stop this army bollocks, we're a small country off North West Europe in the 21st century - time to relax, I reckon.

If you need hostages, allow me to make a few suggestions.

1) Paris Hilton

2) Shotgun

3) AnencephalyBoy

4) Tom Cruise

5) Kevin Federline

6) Brittany Spears

7) Conan O'Brian

8) Hillary Clinton

9) Pat Robertson

10) Rush Limbaugh

That should do for starters. Bailing them out will bankrupt the Red States and we Left Coasters can pass environmentally sane laws for a change.

Sinergy

p.s. Sorry to suggest the Red States will bail out Clinton; you might be stuck with her.

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: For Our British Friends - 4/17/2007 8:48:35 PM

BrutalDemon

Posts: 85
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

I do think Prince Charles says some sensible things such as when he described a building ,or the plans for it, as a monstrous carbuncle on the fabric of society. I agree with that and I never saw the building lol.

And that's just the kind of unsubstantiated opinion we've come to expect... are you a member of the Viewers And Listeners Association, by any chance?

quote:

Anyone who has seen that horrendous large store, located in Birmingham, with the outside covered in silver discs will know what me and Charlie are complaining about.

Oh well... I suppose someone has to correct the wild generalisations and gross inaccuracies you have a habit of stating as 'facts'.

Charles' quote, in full, was... "What is proposed is like a monstrous carbuncle on the face of a much-loved and elegant friend."

He was ACTUALLY refering to the proposed, and then abandoned, extention to the National Gallery in LONDON. The quote is taken, out of context, from a prize presentation made by Charles TO the architect responsible for the Birmingham Selfridges store (the one covered with silver discs) which Charles is, apparently, quite happy with.

His grounds for objection was that the proposed extension to the National Gallery (which was badly needed for reasons of space) was entirely out of keeping with the rest of the building... the extension eventually went ahead and is now known as The Sainsbury Wing, after the donations made by that family. It now houses and displays paintings from the Renaisance, is in character with both the surrounding buildings and its contents, and has the Princes approval.

quote:

As for our National Anthem, an embarrasment and a dirge.

I bet you've never stood at Twickenham for an England match, and listened to fourty thousand voices belting out the phrase "Send her vic-torrr-i-ous..." either.

_____________________________

Old enough to know better... but still young enough to not care

(in reply to seeksfemslave)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: For Our British Friends - 4/18/2007 8:36:49 AM

missturbation

Posts: 8290
Joined: 2/12/2006
From: another planet
Status: offline

I'm going to have to disagree with NG on this one.
I would say the popularity goes as follows: 20% want rid, 30% are royalists, 50% couldn't give a flying one either way.
Most people i have spoken to would get rid of the royal family in a heart beat. I'd say the figures are more like 50% want rid, 20% are royalists and 30% don't really care either way.

Personally i think the royal family are good for tourism but nothing else. Yes they have a place in history, but a place in the future, i'm not so sure. They may bring in a lot of money for this country but they cost a lot too.

There are far more beautiful and interesting tourism attractions than buckingham palace and the tower of london such as the yorkshire dales, the lake district, york, haworth (where the bronte sisters were born), saltaire (sir titus salts village with mill history) and many more.

_____________________________

What you don't witness with your eyes, don't witness with your mouth. Proverb.

If it fit's in a toaster, i can cook it.

Buying 10 item's or less is not shopping !!

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: For Our British Friends - 4/18/2007 2:13:26 PM

popeye1250

Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline

LadyEllen, "Church of England?
I thought most people in England were Presbiterian or Episcopalian?
That must be a church for rich people?

(in reply to LadyEllen)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: For Our British Friends - 4/18/2007 2:58:05 PM

seeksfemslave

Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline

BrutalDemon: I was about to give you a "bollocking" along the lines of how can you read a post and interpret it in way that is just not there.

but having re read my post 3

I can see that it can be interpreted as meaning that I thought that Charlie's "carbuncle" comment was directed at the B'ham building ( 2nd para).
It doesnt say that tho', I just didnt make myself clear.

I believe the National gallery was extended tho' not with the original plans. lol
I also understand that the architect involved lost a lot of business. Well done Charlie I say

The B'ham building is an aesthetic disaster. From the outside I mean.
Ugly, Out of place, intrusive and no doubt when a suitable time has passed will be demolished,. when everyone will then state these obvious truths.

Just as happened to the Rotunda in B'ham. I hope it has been demolished. lol
Or the Mini Metro when it was no longer critical to Rover's survival. They had gone bust !
Or any trendy play in Theatreland which the critics love and the people just wont go and see. Silly people.

I will add my final thought for the day, free of charge....
The esteem in which Liverpudlians view themselves is so ridiculously high as to be bordering on monomaniacal neurosis.
Where's me shert !

< Message edited by seeksfemslave -- 4/18/2007 3:16:25 PM >

(in reply to BrutalDemon)

Profile

Post #: 29