The British Crown is a useless anachronism.

@Moment-in-Time,

Moment-in-Time wrote:

I bought a dvd of the Royals entitled "The Queen." (2006) starring
Helen Mirren as Queen Elizabeth II, and Michael Sheen as PM Tony Blair.

I found that a truly solid film. Ms. Mirren's performance was really strong.

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

I am no royalist, but there is something in the "continuity factor" which presidency seems to lack.

Yes, I agree, the Monarchy represents stability as well as being the British people's heritage and culture. The British have it both ways; they have a PM elected by the people who literally runs the country and Queen Elizabeth is the head of a Constitutional Monarchy.... The Brits are far ahead of the US with its universal health care for its citizens.

I am a great admirer of the British Monarchy and one individual Royal....the Queen being my particular favorite. I was thoroughly delighted by the antics of the late Princess Diana; although her unhappiness towards the end turned her into a very angry individual; her actions appeared calculated to cause much distress for the Monarchy.....this led the Queen and some other Royals to dislike Diana intensely, especially after her national interview with the then reporter, Martin Bashir, casting the Royals in a very cold light. After Diana's premature death, I came to feel sorry for her because Charles used her as a baby factory, discarding her like yesterday's newspapers after she had did her duty (my personal opinion). I resent Camilla as the other woman whose presence never gave this marriage a chance. Too bad Charles cannot be skipped over in favor of William.

Still, I remain a huge American follower of the British Monarchy (I'm not at all interested in the minor European monarchies). Queen Elizabeth will be 88 years of age in April. She must be tired and Prince Philip (93 yrs), despite his myriad faults, has been by the Queen's side through all the ups and downs. I believe if Prince Philip predeceased the Queen, all the zest for living would be gone for her.

0 Replies

Oh, no, down to their last 1.6 million of their budget (not their fortune) because of overspending on god-knows-what.
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/28/22479561-uks-queen-elizabeth-down-to-last-16-million-in-reserves-after-royal-overspend
Why are the Royals given any money at all? They have plenty.

Joe(so odd)Nation

1 Reply

@Joe Nation,

I had an argument with my parents about the Royals contributing more in taxes than they took from the civil list. Where did they get those estates from in the first place?

Are you saying heads of state should not be given any funding for official duties?

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Quote:

Are you saying heads of state should not be given any funding for official duties?

Not if they have the money to pay for it themselves.
Their wealth has come from the luck of birth and history (and, I'm sure, some shrewd investments in things they had control and input over.) The British people have provided enormous amounts of largess to a very small group of people for the past 1000 years, but they really haven't been of much use since the Scots got pissed and forced the 1707 Act of Union.
Then, George III got Porphyria and lost the Lower American Colonies.
(I know, not such a big loss in some of my friend's eyes either.)
And it's been downhill for the Royals ever since in terms of power, but not in the amount social influence and, I guess, the boosting of morale.
I always question whether or not the British of England are getting their money's worth from the pomp and cheerleading. meh.
Two other things:
I think it's nice that the Queen pays taxes on the income she receives from the taxes Parliament has taken from the people. I have no idea if the other Royals do the same.
and
My displeasure with the Royals began with me as a boy when I found out that there can never be again be a Roman Catholic on the throne. I've given up Catholicism, but I feel for any Catholic British subject, say, living in Belfast, who has no chance or hope of seeing someone of like mind wearing the Crown.

Joe( ah, the sorrow)Nation Very Happy

3 Replies

But the Queen walks around turning out unnecessary lights.

0 Replies

@Joe Nation,

The Scots are always pissed, they invented whisky.

After Bloody Mary what do you expect?

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

The Scots are always pissed, they invented whisky.

After Bloody Mary what do you expect?

I don t drink much.
Remind me what thay put in a Bloody Mary.

2 Replies

@Joe Nation,

This should cheer you up.

The law that bans a British monarch from marrying a Catholic is to be lifted after more than 300 years.

The reforms were announced following the unanimous agreement of the 16 nations that have the Queen as their constitutional head of state.

Quote:

But they will not include the repeal of a Catholic becoming monarch because allegiance to the pope might conflict with the sovereign’s role as the supreme governor of the Church of England.

The changes will also see the end of the ancient tradition of male primogeniture, the rule under which boys take precedence in the line to the throne over elder sisters.
The reforms will be included in the next programme of parliamentary business to be unveiled in November, while New Zealand will lead a working group to coordinate their implementation in other Commonwealth countries.

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2011/10/31/ban-on-british-monarch-marrying-a-catholic-to-be-lifted/

0 Replies

Bloody Mary was Mary Tudor, daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon--she was not Scots.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

You need to be reminded? You must have had a skinful. I think it's vodka, tomato juice, lea & perrins and tabasco.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

I 'll drink to that.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

I knew that, I was responding to two separate comments by Joe, one about Scotland, one about Catholics. Mary was more of a Taffy than anything else. Then again her mum was a Spanish princess.

0 Replies

@Joe Nation,

Joe Nation wrote:

I've given up Catholicism, but I feel for any Catholic British subject, say, living in Belfast, who has no chance or hope of seeing someone of like mind wearing the Crown.

You have broached something more than you might think. To be a minority in a country, does not have to lead to unfulfilled dreams/hopes, if one accepts one's place in society, and has the "tolerance for ambiguity" that understands that a society's pecking order does not mean that those below top dog are not essential and valued. I consider it puerile to think that every ethnicity in the U.S. dreams of one of their own one day inhabiting the Oval Office. Needless to say, the day that Kennedy was inaugurated, there were plenty of Irish-Americans that "kvelled" (puffed-up) with ethnic pride. So, now a half century later, we have a VP in the Oval Office, but not because he is Irish-American, but in my opinion, Southern white Democrats might not have liked seeing a WASP report to a Black President. So, did the country really overcome anything, with the election of Kennedy, considering we still have not had a slew of different ethnicities, that are Catholic, in the White House?

My prediction is we'll have an Hispanic President in our lifetime. But, are Jews really that different to not even care to have a President of their religion? And, that is not sour grapes, since many Jews just think a Jewish President would raise the dormant level of anti-Semitism with any bad decisions.

Do you really think that Brits that are Catholic need to have one of their own, to be on the throne, to have a healthy feeling of self-esteem, as a Brit? I thought the religion gave one an algorithm for entering the Kingdom of Heaven, not caring about who rules the Kingdom on Earth?

1 Reply

In "job" terms, the Royals are diplomats, making goodwill visits all around the world, drawing big crowds who are thrilled to see a real live Queen.. Smile

In "entertainment" terms, they're like soap show stars whose lives hold millions spellbound.. Smile

For example Prince Harry draws huge crowds of young lady admirers; the last time he visited America they were queuing up to rip off his pants.. Smile

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

In "job" terms, the Royals are diplomats, making goodwill visits all around the world, drawing big crowds who are thrilled to see a real live Queen..
In "entertainment" terms, they're like soap show stars whose lives hold millions spellbound..
For example Prince Harry draws huge crowds of young lady admirers; the last time he visited America they were queuing up to rip off his pants..

Or, one can think of them as entertainment for Anglophiles. Or, one can think of them as symbolic of the British love of pomp and circumstance. Sort of a visual version of a tablespoon of jam.

0 Replies

The "Taffy" strain in the Tudors is not as great as your remark suggests. Owen Tudor married Catherine de Valois, the daughter of Charles VI of France, and the widow of Henry V. Their son, Edmond Tudor, married Margaret de Beaufort, who was about as English as you can get. It was their son, Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, who became Henry VII. Only one of Henry VII's four grandparents was Welsh. Henry VII married Elizabeth of York, and his son Henry VIII married Catherine of Aragon. Mary Tudor didn't have very much Welsh blood at all.

History is hard!

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

It was their son, Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, who became Henry VII. Only one of Henry VII's four grandparents was Welsh.

He was still Welsh though.

Quote:

The Tudor dynasty was a royal house of Welsh origin, descended from Prince Rhys ap Tewdwr, that ruled the Kingdom of England and its realms, including the Lordship of Ireland, later the Kingdom of Ireland, from 1485 until 1603. Its first monarch was Henry VII, a descendant through his mother of a legitimised branch of the English royal House of Lancaster. The Tudor family rose to power in the wake of the Wars of the Roses, which left the House of Lancaster, to which the Tudors were aligned, extinct.

It's not the blood that matters, it's the soul. Mary's Welsh soul.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_dynasty

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Sure, Bubba . . . Little Miss Can't Be Wrong . . . Oliver Cromwell was descended from a Welshman, Morgan ap William--do you allege that Cromwell was, therefore, Welsh?

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

David: Bloody Marys are made with Vodka or, godhelpus, Gin.
Whiskey is never mixed with anything when you are in my presence.

Joe(not even ice)Nation

1 Reply

The British Crown is a useless anachronism.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know