See we don't have a "Happy Birthday Mrs. Sovereign" strand yet ....

[non sociopath skin]

So how do we stand on republicanism, then?

Or are Lizzie, Phil and Chuck doing a grand job?

Just thought I'd ask ... :dilemma: :shrug: :dilemma: :shrug: :dilemma: :shrug:

The Skin

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. I'm apathetic

I'd rather have a republic, but I don't care too much about it. I don't think many of Chuck's opinions are very good, and I wish the media would stop giving them such prominence. One thing to say for Liz is that she keeps her views to herself, and I don't know if he will if/when he takes over.

I'll sign off now, to listen to the loyal address to Liz by Chuck on Radio 4. Maybe he'll persuade me to be a monarchist.

[mr blur]

2. Republic for me.

I'd happily see them all tied in a big sack and dumped in the Thames. Inbred, ignorant, arrogant, greedy, stupid, halfwit leeches, the lot of them. They're just using up oxygen that other creatures could make use of, really.

[non sociopath skin]

4. ... So that's a "No," then ....

:rofl:

The Skin

[sweetheart]

3. are the royal corgi's on parade again?

They break out the dogs every once in a while,
running about all brushed and cruffed up,
barking in a gilded carriage for a mile,
and we're all so impressed with the new tupp.

Last of the monarchs on a fabled walk,
on a fated day before the weather heat's up,
butterfly leaders great of diplomatic talk,
last of the queenies on a porcelin cup.

Historic forever and behindwards looking,
the monarch kept itself safe without giving up,
that 2006 its still safe without no king,
will they finally decide to buy more popular pups.

Then the king can be a dog on every little coin,
flip the new pound over, the dog will show his groin.

:-)

[non sociopath skin]

5. ... and one for ... er .... Government by Corgis.... ???

The Skin

[sweetheart]

9. Royal Dogs

Government by progressives.... and some dogs with unused royal
perogative.

[LeftishBrit]

6. I'm apathetic too...

I think that it would be nice if people didn't treat ordinary, not specially intelligent human beings as the symbols of their country, who deserve a luxurious lifestyle, massive public attention to every little event in their lives, and a feeling on the part of some people that it is 'unpatriotic' not to treat them with the utmost respect.

But, if people do insist on doing so, then I'd rather that the objects of such treatment were largely-powerless royals ('highly-paid models for postage stamps' as they were once described), than powerful political figures, such as America's Mad King George.

ETA: The corgis might well be more intelligent than either the average royal or the average politician!

[non sociopath skin]

12. Yes, I tend to say, when asked ....

.... that I've seen too many bad prime ministers - and far too many bad presidents - to get too excited about the virtues of an elected, rather than a hereditary, Head of State.

But on so-styled "Royal Occasions," I do get pissed off with the "Wham Bam Thank You Very Kindly Ma'am" brand of public deference and the suggestion that these patently ordinary human beings somehow possess superhuman powers of loyalty, endeavour and fortitude.

Of course, that's at least as much the fault of the royalists as it is of the royals.

The Skin

[tjwmason]

17. That's very true - and I would add to that

Britain (if Britain were to survive such a shift) becoming a Republic would be a matter in the hands of those who create the laws (i.e., politicians). When was the last time that a politician took power and voluntarily passed it to somebody else? Look at the Australian proposal defeated in the referendum - the politicians wanted to put the new presidency as their property, within their nice little club - that's not a step forwards for democracy.

Whatever the merits of any given case, I strongly suspect that if/when we go down the republic route it will be more on the French or American models than the German or Italian.

Merely saying President Tony or President Dave is enough to make me feel queasy.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

29. If that worries you,

Allow me to remind you that the Iron Lady is still techincally alive...

[Taxloss]

7. The sound of tumbrils is music to my ears.

I'm proud to be a republican. Try saying that in GD.

That said, I've got a lot of respect for Liz. She has been a constant in a half-century of great change, and has kept her trap shut. Her idiot son and his obscenely arrogant and spoiled children are a different matter.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

8. Happy Birthday Queen Elizabeth

I advocate republicanism, but bear no ill-will to the Queen. The thing is, monarchy falls down whenever someone inherits the throne who is not up to the job (yes you, Prince Chuck). Whenever Elizabeth ceases to be Queen, I hope Britain and other Commonwealth Realms reassess their respective constitutional positions (if not before).

No I don't think the US presidential system is suitable, but I do like the Irish presidential system.

I'd like a Commonwealth of Great Britain (and Northern Ireland) headed by an elected "Lord/Dame Protector" (an elected, but ceremonial position).

[moggie]

10. You have a sense of history, sir!

"Lord Protector", indeed! Perhaps we could find a descendant of Old Ironsides himself.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

19. Why thank you, Sir n/t

[fedsron2us]

20. My sentiments exactly.

Monarchy is an institution whose survival singularly depends upon the occupant of the post. Even ardent royalists acknowledge that fact. While Elizabeth Windsor lives the monarchy it is safe. After that I expect the bookies will be slashing the odds on its demise.

The genius of the current occupant of the throne is that in a world of celebs she is spectacularly mundane. Looking back over the decades she always seems to have warn the same style of clothes and had the same hair style. One suspects that her hair dressing bill is considerably less than Cherie Blair's. Elizabeth also recognises that her job is simply to play the role of Queen (i.e to appear on stamps, open Parliament, entertain foreign heads of state, watch endless displays of ethnic dancing). She may have opinions on many subjects but she has the wisdom and courtesy to keep her views to herself. By comparison her son is a deluded fool who assumes we all want to listen to his blatherings on architecture, religion etc. Loose lips sink ships and he will probably wind up sending the House of Windsor to the bottom if he does not change his ways.

[Greeby]

11. Think there needs to be a new name for it

Like anti-monarchism or something. Who'd wanna be referred to these days as a Republican? :crazy:

[TheBaldyMan]

16. nothing wrong with being a republican, not a US Republican Party member.

The words democracy and republic both mean 'rule by the people'

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. That's exactly how I put it yesterday

when trying to describe The Independent to the Americans without getting sidetracked into the meanings of 'republican'.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2239677&mesg_id=2239946

[sweetheart]

13. Selling off the royal family

I have an idea for a privatization that i'm sure the tory's
would really like! The royal family could be auctioned
off. Of course, whomever bought one, would have to provide
certain castle grounds and riding facilities for their new royal,
but provided these were to the standards of the RSPCA.

I'd wager the royal family could fill in gordon
brown's black hole, and he wouldn't have to sell off
any other assets. What a coup! Then the public could
privatize the maintenance tag of the royals, and they
could be kept like deer on estates, photographed for
coinage and watched for their bedroom antics. ;-)

Somebody tell Cameron!

[T_i_B]

14. The good news.....

...is that in the village where I work they are having a big do at the village hall in Her Majesty's honour. The bad news is that I can't see that happening too much outside of small villages with no mobile phone reception.

I'm another person who's apathetic about the Monarchy, although I do think it's funny that having complained for years about the Royals being in a privileged position for doing very little, Britain now seems very keen on making reality TV stars rich, famous and plastered all over Heat magazine for doing even less.

[TheBaldyMan]

15. republican. The the UK is long overdue for a complete overhaul.

[Captain Hilts]

21. I'll trade W for QEII ANY day! Happy Birthday Lillibet! nt

[Dutch]

22. Well, you guys had the chance to trade W for a better man..

The glory of democratic republicanism- if the people want a leader that'll take them to hell, that's what they'll get. But of course in the mosr serene constitutional monarchy of Great Britain we've managed the double- a head of state we didn't get to choose, and a power-crazed government leader we did choose that's taking us to hell!

So if you took the trade you propose, you'd have to take Blair too as part of the bundle, with all those lovely crown perogative powers bundled in to boot- no more pesky congress thinking it has a say on whether the US should go to war!

[Captain Hilts]

24. Well, at least your system ADMITS it's unitary...

ours doesn't.

Anyone have a copy of that funny letter from 2000 where Liz claims to be reclaiming the States for Britain? That was pretty funny.

[Dutch]

25. But congress did have its say. It's not the constitution's fault that

warmongering Repubs and supine DINOs have been elected to dominance on the capitol and chose to gave Bush carte blanche on Iraq.

[Captain Hilts]

26. The Bush Admin. has cut access to Congress of information to ...

the point that Congressional oversight over the executive branch is dead. Friends of mine at GAO said the Bush Admin. just doesn't cooperate with oversight. And the Supremes let Cheney get away with crap like not releasing notes about the energy panel.

Yes, we've become a unicameral system.

I guess that means Connecticut is no longer the "Constitution State."

[Dutch]

27. Well, if that's how you really feel, we could do the trade

But only on the condition that we travel back in time 70 years so we get FDR and you get Edward VIII. He needs the work anyway, plus he can stay with the in-laws while you build his new palace.;)

[Dutch]

28. And actually, the extent of Prime Ministerial power is rarely admitted

at all. If your system's romantic facade is the seperation of powers, ours is parliamentary sovereignty. And the level of parliamentary oversight and scrutiny of the executive is pathetic- and being further rolled back by Blair.

Plus, soon as boredom drives me to revisit this thread, I might as well add that the British parliament isn't unicameral, it's (just about) bicameral.;)

[Anarcho-Socialist]

30. You're right...

...this is why I disagree with the frequently used term "President Blair" since the Prime Minister's powers and influence within government go much further than the French and U.S. Presidents' powers within their systems.

[Dutch]

23. self-delete n/t