I’m English, AMA
- Thread starter maxi
- Start date
the last man
corn lord
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2016
- Messages
- 4,831
- Nebulae
- 24,736
the last man
corn lord
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2016
- Messages
- 4,831
- Nebulae
- 24,736
followup question:
when and what events concerning the royal family will facilitate the inevitable political crisis that leads to a constitutional reform of the united kingdom
paedophile prince-son of her majesty has so far not seemed to be enough so i wonder what is next
this is a question i want a genuine answer to from an english conservative
Reactions:
List
abcdefg
Atom
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 2,270
- Nebulae
- 2,035
vtipoman
Electron
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2016
- Messages
- 693
- Nebulae
- 704
maxi
maxiboy
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 3,933
- Nebulae
- 6,102
Because I absolutely hate free healthcare and would like to pay £30,000 for hayfever tablets
Let’s stick to the movie, folks
we’re getting there, can’t comment just yet but we are getting there
If you want my honest answer, I don’t think we’ll see a monarch after QE2, certainly not after Charles. Monarchy is, in a certain sense, outdated and on its last legs in the country. The monarch has ceremonial power only- she has no real power as this can only be exercised through the prime minister’s prerogative. I do believe the queen has an important role in acting as a uniting figurehead, but this role is slowly becoming less and less important as time goes by. It would only take reform akin to the post war state OR labour’s reforms in 1997 to introduce a catalyst for widespread liberal change.
we’re not
we have regional accents you know!!!
Piss off gov
bigger than yours I bet
Hey
Reactions:
List
Microsoft Powerpoint
Proton
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2016
- Messages
- 269
- Nebulae
- 168
a deeply unpopular monarch that doesnt resonate with old or young, royalist or republican
with prince charles due to take the throne and william thereafter the monarchy isnt under any threat
the reason our monarchy is so popular is because the ruling monarch and the monarchy in general fulfils an actual constitutional and [a]-political purpose and aren't just a band of aristocrats that spend their lives drinking swans blood and eating truffles with whatever life they care to have. expecting the monarchy to go anywhere within the next 100 years shows a lack of depth. political impartiality has always been a requisite of senior royals/the ruling monarch, whatever event 'ousts' them from power will have to be very specific
the question isnt exclusive to conservatives either, the monarchy is deeply popular within the labour party, excluding flannels like zarah sultana who nobody takes seriously. bar hardline socialists and comparative extremists the royal family has never been ideologically split between parties, not least because its political suicide
Last edited by a moderator:
the last man
corn lord
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2016
- Messages
- 4,831
- Nebulae
- 24,736
i know very well that it fills a basic constitutional purpose and why it's so popular, which is why i believe it is only a matter of time before there is some crisis that facilitates a formalization of the monarchy's constitutional role beyond its very broad capacity it's holding now
when i said "constitutional reform" i did not mean the royal family or monarchy ousted and some form of republic being instated
i don't believe that the monarchy will be completely safe as long as the sovereign is politically impartial. The royal family has a lot of offshoots, princes, princesses and what not that have shown themselves to be very partial to participating in scandals of different sorts. Obviously as we've seen having a paedophile in the core royal family hasn't necessarily been enough for people to start asking fundamental questions about why you have such a huge institution of unaccountable people around the sovereign, but it begs the question of what scandal it is going to be
