Queen Elizabeth II set to become longest reigning UK Monarch

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by bradl, Sep 8, 2015.

  1. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #1
    I'm not a subject of the Crown, but from a yank on this side of the pond, my hat is off to the lovely lady, and My Country, 'Tis of Thee God Save the Queen. :D

    http://www.sacbee.com/news/nation-world/world/article34327179.html

    Now.. her and GHWB should tandem skydive to celebrate. :)

    BL.
     
  2. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #2
    Her and her family are nothing but scrounging parasites..... The divine right of kings is no longer valid in the modern day, the idea of royalty and subjects should be dissolved and the Windsor's estates made public property, and they should have to pay back the income they've had off the state during her reign.
     
  3. displaced macrumors 65816

    displaced

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Gravesend, United Kingdom
    #3
    Personally, I reckon Republicans in the UK are misdirecting their anger.

    Let's say the monarchy were abolished tomorrow. All that land is now 'public property'. All that would happen is that the same crappy housing developers will buy the land up cheap and build crappy houses. Meanwhile, the government (local and national), utility and transport companies will continue to fail to build the requisite schools, surgeries, hospitals, police stations, railway and road links that are needed.

    There is no pressing issue in the UK today that would be solved by abolishing the monarchy. Parliament, however... well, don't get me started about that collective shower of fools playing a game which is wholly unsuitable for running a country.

    (not that there's much country-running to do these days -- they've sold everything important off to private companies backed by other country's governments)
     
  4. vkd macrumors 6502a

    vkd

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    #4
    AKA "The Maid", she is doing nothing more than sitting in and taking care of a position. She is of German bloodline origin, which perhaps ties in with the fact that Adolf was trained at Tavistock?
     
  5. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #5
    Really? IIUC, Westminster Palace is public property, has that happened to it?
     
  6. Scepticalscribe Contributor

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #6
    Ah.

    Personally, I tend to prefer the idea of an elected head of State to that of a Monarchy, but that is not really the issue under discussion here. Moreover, I do take your point about unfinished revolutions from the 17th century, whereby the inhabitants of the UK are still subjects, rather than citizens, which - I'll admit - is a matter of no small concern.

    However, let us draw a bit of a distinction between the wider family of Her Majesty, ancestors, spouse, children, and other members of the wider, extended family, and her own reign. Although I don't doubt that her ancestors (and indeed some of her descendants) are raving Tories (Andrew Marr has some interesting asides on her father, let alone her uncle), let it be acknowledged that during her reign - during her very long reign, - she, herself, has hardly put a foot wrong.

    Her nose for nuance and political balance is superb. Offhand, I find it hard to think of a major political blunder, or faux-pas that she has committed over the course of her entire reign (the miscalculation of public emotion to Diana's death was perhaps the closest she came to a misreading of a situation which is an astonishing record over a period of 60 years) - which is not something that can be said of her family. She has learned, and evolved, and adapted to the times.

    You don't have to like the idea of inherited wealth and privilege and horrible habits of deference (and I don't) to salute an absolute consummate and hard-working professional. Would that her ancestors - and indeed her descendants - match her work-rate, and her sheer, consummate professionalism.


    An unfair post, and an uninformed, unbalanced and ungenerous one.
     
  7. bradl thread starter macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #7
    Would you say the same of GWB, GHWB, and Jeb Bush? I ask, because they are related to the Royal Family as well.

    BL.
     
  8. displaced, Sep 9, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2015

    displaced macrumors 65816

    displaced

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Gravesend, United Kingdom
    #8
    That's pretty much how I feel about it. British citizens have infinitely more to fear from the actions of Parliament than those of the Crown.

    However, no 'British Subjects' have been born for many decades. We're citizens. Have been since 1949. In addition, since 1981 people in overseas territories became citizens rather than subjects. There's a tiny loophole in the legislation that means a small number of people in the Republic of Ireland born before 1949 retain British Subject status, but that's falling by the year.)

    No-one in the UK has been a British Subject for 66 years. No-one in the British Overseas Territories or Dependencies has been a British Subject for 34 years.

    [edit: and perhaps the fact that we've all been citizens for so long without realising means that the whole point was rather moot. Citizen, subject, comrade, serf, peon, pleb ... whatever. Worrying about the label used is a ridiculous distraction from holding to account the over-inflated senses of self-worth that inhabit Parliament]

    I was thinking more of the open land owned by the estates. Once that reverted to local government ownership all bets would be off. But seeing how my local council is currently handling housebuilding without any consideration to facilities, I doubt it would be well handled.

    In fact, after a little research, it seems that the Crown Estates are actually owned by a statutory corporation, with revenue going straight into the Treasury, not to the Royal Family.

    Oh, and Westminster Palace is a beautiful building designed and built by fine British craftsmen. A reminder that once upon a time our artistic and mechanical abilities were beyond 'yet another glass office block/shopping centre' or 'dull tiny houses with cardboard for walls and lofts too weak to store your christmas decorations'
     
  9. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #9
    I love the royal family. I hope they stick around for a long long time.

    God Save the Queen.
     
  10. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #10
    Just so you know, by next week, she will reach #47 in longest reigning monarchs, and #46 a couple weeks after that. To get to the top, she has to live to about 107 years old, but the King of Thailand is already up to #22, 5 and a half years ahead of her and still racking up the years.
     
  11. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #11
    Hardly put a foot wrong?

    The royal family exist at the expense of the tax payer, contributing very little to the country. The royal estates are valued at 8-10 billion, none of which the public has access too, without paying. Huge swathes of the aristocracy own stolen land, gifted to them by the royal family.

    This is just the tip of the iceberg. The monarchy are an anti democratic establishment, who have powers to secretly influence government and contribute very little to the UK, whilst the taxpayer supports them.
     
  12. vkd, Sep 10, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 10, 2015

    vkd macrumors 6502a

    vkd

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    #12
    Demons, all.

    "God save the queen, its a fascist regime. They made you a moron, potential H-bomb."

    "God save the queen, she ain't no human being. There is no future in England's dreaming."

    Leeches.
     
  13. Phil A. Moderator

    Phil A.

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Location:
    Shropshire, UK
    #13
    Neither am I - I'm a British Citizen and nothing would please me more than if she was also the last constitutional monarch of the UK
     
  14. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #14
    God save Johnny Rotten, too.
     
  15. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #15
    Me neither, UK citizen by birth, European citizen by choice.
     
  16. Eric Best macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    Location:
    Tamworth, NSW, Australia
    #16
    Opposing monarchy to democracy is silly and counterfactual. Hitler's Germany - republic; USSR - republic; China - republic, North Korea - republic; Saddam's Iraq - republic, etc, etc. Sweden - monarchy; UK - monarchy; Australia - monarchy; Canada - monarchy; Netherlands - monarchy, Spain - monarchy, etc etc. Totalitarians hate modern monarchies because they separate the symbolic centre of a state from the political power centre. Totalitarians want to be both. Modern monarchies stymie the lusts of politicians to be 'the One' and represent a unity and continuity of the state that transcends the politics of the day. God save the Queen!
     
  17. vkd macrumors 6502a

    vkd

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    #17
    I took birth in Bournemouth, England, but prefer to consider myself an eternal, transcendental spirit soul, free of material, invented designations. I do not belong to this town or that, this country or piece of land or another. The whole planet belongs to all of the living entities present upon it, equally. Isn't it? Why limit yourself to some blinkered, imposed concept that is external to your true self? Break out from the shell that encases you, it is a mental jail, an imaginary cage that does not really exist! "Free your mind and your ass will follow" !!!

    So-called 'nationalities' are simply an accounting tool, used by the "system" to herd and control us. :)
     
  18. impulse462 Suspended

    impulse462

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    #18
    I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but on the chance that you're being serious, I agree with you.
     
  19. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #19
    I would expect that the Land Registry and the Deed holders would disagree.:cool:
     
  20. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #20
    I live in the UK, but I have not applied to be a citizen. This is in part because it used to require a pledge to the queen and her heirs in perpetuity. I think that might have changed now.

    In any case, the Queen has truly served the public longer and more faithfully than most politicians and civil servants. I have tremendous respect for her. It seems fine to me to celebrate the longevity of her reign, but that's just me.
     
  21. vrDrew, Sep 11, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2015

    vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #21
    If one were starting our to design a modern democratic nation state, I don't think hereditary Constitutional Monarchy would top too many people's lists of models to follow. But Britain has been a Monarchy for pretty much all of its existence (with a crummy dictatorial Commonwealth for few years in the 17th century.)

    All things considered, Britain gets a pretty good deal out of the Monarchy. Many of the Scots who voted to disassociate themselves from the hated sassenachs still wanted to keep Liz' & Company as their Queen, which is some sort of backhanded compliment. Britain benefits from its unique relationship with its monarchy in some surprising ways. Consider:

    The British Prime Minister is emphatically not the head of State. Which puts a fundamental check on the executive's aggregation of power. There is no "Royal Air Force One" - and when David Cameron flies to Washington - he goes commercial. If a British Prime Minister screws up, he (or she) goes quietly - taking his resignation letter to the Queen; with no Darth Vader-like Chief of Staff toying with the nuclear button back at Downing Street.

    The British taxpayer gets a good deal out of the Monarchy too. Not just the billions of pounds of tourism-related revenue from punters flocking to Knightsbridge and Kensington. As noted earlier the Crown Estate (which owns much of the prime real estate in London's West End) provides the best part of a billion pounds a year in revenue to the Exchequer. And the Crown Estate was formed as part of deal with good old George III (the mad one) - who gave up vast tracts of the most valuable property in the world in exchange for a generous (but affordable) allowance for the Royal Family in perpetuity - the Civil List; which keeps the Monarch in corgi kibble and demure hats. The Crown Estate has also provided the benefit of keeping the worst type of commercial development from ruining central London. If the Luftwaffe didn't have to power to ruin the West End - ruthless real estate developer surely did.

    One may argue about the injustice of inherited wealth. But I'd argue that the offspring of Britain's Royal family have to work for their privilege in the way no child of a New York hedge fund tycoon or Texas oil baron does. Both of Diana's sons have served in their nation's armed forces, and the current presumed Heir-in-waiting risks his life every day as the pilot of a rescue helicopter. Nobody gives a hoot if Larry Ellison's daughter smashes up a Lamborghini; and certainly his grandchildren won't be hounded by paparazzi from kindergarten to college graduations.
     
  22. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #22
    Wow, a long time to be sitting on the throne. Must have some ring around her ass.
     
  23. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #23
    Hippy
     
  24. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #24
    Well apart from her and her family have milked the tax payers for millions of not billions of pounds. And her husband is a racist and her son has been involved in scandal.

    Not to mention her family was sympathetic to the nazis.
     
  25. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #25
    The notion that the royals bring in "billions of pounds" in tourism is a total fallacy. They bring in a relative pittance.

    http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/do-royals-make-us-richer.html?m=1
     

Share This Page