The British Crown is a useless anachronism.

I do.

So would you like a system like America where the president is independent of Parliament?

I have to listen to some of my fellow New Yorkers coo about your Royals, it seems, at least twice a month, they drag one of them out before a crowd and there is great discussion as to the shape of a particular hat or shoe or something. (It makes me wish Omsigdavid was with us so I could grab his gun and shoot myself.)
Izzy, let's get rid of that exchange agreement. I'll get them to drop it from this end, you get all of Britain to promise never to export another bagpipe in this direction.

Joe(you many continue to allow the Irish to send the Jameson)Nation

...the absence of Royals in the States maybe ends up explaining well the preference of the average American for the excessive lavishing style in decoration, the fascination with Hollywood idols, and the need for big cars...

I didn't say they're necessary, so don't try to prop that strawman up in front of me. I said in societies that have and want them. Go back and read the post from which you selectively quoted. I explained their usefulness in the eyes of those who have and want them.

Be respectful now, don't generalize the few silly people with the general US population. And there is nothing wrong with owning big vehicles, as long as you can pay for its upkeep.

Why would Americans want to pay to maintain a family's existence just because they were born? The british monarchy even discrminates against most religions. If a black person were to miraculously be a member of the 'family' they would end the monarchy and call it a welfare program. But, as long as they remain white the brits are willing to pay for their lifestyles. If the queen said "screw you" to everyone tomorrow, they will still support the monarchy... that's privilege. The US wasn't founded on unearned privilege like the British monarchy.

We have no control over what the Irish do. It seems your problem is with people cooing about the Royals. If that's the case you should come over here. Most people are completely neutral about the Queen. Jubilee aside, that was more to do with having a day off more than anything else.

I used to describe myself as an armchair Republican, if there was a vote to abolish the monarchy I'd vote to get rid of it. Recently I'm not so sure, I don't favour either alternative to the monarchy. It's also something that is now fairly unique to Britain, and is part of our national character. Nobody can do pomp and circumstance quite like us.

In any event my position hasn't changed that much, I've gone from thinking we should probably get rid of the Royal Family to thinking we should probably keep it. It doesn't really engage my emotions that much. There's a few die hard Royalists and probably a similar amount of Republicans, but most people aren't that bothered. I think there's far more Americans whose emotions get fired up over the royals where you are than over here.

Anyway, she keeps comics like Russell Howard in work.

Then again, probably not.

...humour on Royalty is normally good evidence on how important they keep on being in peoples minds...it is my impression the worse they speak the more alive they are...I personally although having royal blood couldn't care less on what system we adhere to prevented we are speaking on constitutional monarchy...administration should be by obvious reasons entirely separate from the role of representing the identity and tradition of a culture although it should strive to respect them...for all that I care Royals could and should be elected by the people for a lifetime mandate based on proven merit in a trial period...heritage should thus evolve from the concept of bloodline continuity towards the concept of cultural continuity...

I admit to an excess in opinion in there, but not so much...it relates.

It doesn't relate to anything in the United States.

Well, I'm not sure if that's what I meant; I would like a system like France or Germany.

I suspect we have 2 different views on what the "royals" ultimately represent in peoples minds as I am not necessarily addressing its formal expression...the difference between the States and some country's in Europe is that the States opt for another kind of Royals, Hollywood being the perfect example...but each country in its own way end up having an engraved form of royalty in its culture...
the American tendency for exaggeration only proves America is a young nation and keeps striving for attention, getting noticed...the vivid expression of its power is in itself a continued statement on the most royal condition.

Disney is to America as The Royal Family is to Brittan.
Generally speaking, ridiculous characters that are good for tourism. Basically the same.

As ususal, given that you don't know what you're talking about, you just make it up as you go along.

I gladly agree most royals are ridiculous characters...some are natural born idiots others learn to pretend...people wouldn't have it any other way.

Oh I do but I am not interested in peaking a fight with you over it...anyway if you could substantiate any concrete commentary on my faulty reasoning maybe I would understand the motives of your disagreement.

Royalty represents the visible image of power and there are of course all sorts of power beyond the traditional monochromatic conception of State.

OK, you came up with some silly ass comment about large automobiles. Large automobiles only date to about the late 1950s or early 1960s. At that time there was almost no import market in the United States, so big steel and big auto could pretty well sell the public whatever they could get away with. Gasoline was dirt cheap, and most of it was a domestic product then. So people were OK with big cars. After 1973, however, big cars looked less and less attractive. Even what pass for big cars today have gotten smaller. Nothing daunted, though, the auto companies started building SUVs. They got bigger and bigger in the same kind of competition loop as took place after 1958. It has nothing to do with "exaggeration" or the lack of royalty. I see no reason to consider Americans any more fond of exaggeration than other nations. Look at all the goofy bullshit European nations come up with aristocracy, royalty, ancient guilds, university regalia.

As usual, you're just shooting from the hip, making up some bullshit to suit the topic. You don't know ****-all about the United States.

America is full of queens: celebrities and government members who expect to live like royalty and find willing servants.

First I never said other nations don't express the same kind of tendency's in their own way, second the specific conditions by which big cars were commercially viable says nothing on why people prefer them...third obviously my abuse on metaphor regarding American behaviour and royalty does not counter nor favour my general argument, so you are miss targeting...and yes I agree I don't know much about America although I have my personnel impressions on it...anyway I doubt anyone knows much about their own reality...fourth I dispense your typical explosive behaviour on disagreement and rather have your useful insight on whatever is being debated as mostly I valued your opinion...a petty that you so often opt for this kind of approach...