I am not an anarchist, as I haven't got involved in terrorism or treason. However, I am tired now of hearing about the monarchy. They actually fulfilled a purpose before the times of parliament. Now, theyre a tourist attraction, a waste of taxpayers money. The royal family are really nothing anyway, a load of racist, upper class bigots. Does anyone else agree? Or am I a treasonous bas***d?
2007-07-09 12:03:26 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
I'm not an american...im English. Otherwise I can't have a moan about my monarchy, as it wouldn't affect me if I was an American..
2007-07-10 10:43:18 · update #1
I don't know everything they do but I think you're right they have no meaningful purpose!
Maybe I'm jealous, but why should a Paris Hilton be popular?
Why should anyone be "special" because they're the son or daughter of so and so. Either it is Rock or Movie star.. the only thing that'll make them stand apart from any other human are their lifestyle and money that's been given to them!
Very few are "self-made".
2007-07-09 12:19:45 · answer #1 · answered by chrism76 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You all have it made with the royal family. The Sovereign may not have much power but the power she does have does come with teeth. Reserved powers. She can kill any bill from passing as well as just about fire (dismiss) your parliment and prime minister at will. They are ever hardly used but they are there as a safe guard just in case the politics gets in the way of the governtment from getting the job done. I mean look at us in the US. A three branch system doesn always work when you have a 2 party system. It would be nice to have a 4th branch that can threaten the other 3 to do there job or else.
I dont know about you being treasonous but you sure sound american.
2007-07-09 23:10:42 · answer #2 · answered by Michael 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think it's "necessary", but it's a nice symbolic reminder of the nation's history and culture. Besides, having the royalty generates lots of money for Britain in terms of increased tourism. The queen also symbolizes and personifies the country much better than the PM could.
2007-07-09 17:38:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Royalty isn'tnecessary. At this point of Britian was a republic it would be no worse off. Royalty may have some symbolic value. Other countrys get along with out royality Britian could too.
2007-07-09 16:42:36 · answer #4 · answered by Jack L 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well that's what we all thought when we got ride of Britain's rule. Now America pays to keep some other useless old man in the white house, but at least we can say we voted him in.... Oh wait, I guess that just makes it worse. You got stuck with your useless old woman, we voted in our useless old man.
Anyway, still think you should kick the B* out. She just wastes your money that could be going to good causes. Why do they deserve to be living the high life any more than you do? Because she was born into it? How archaic and backwards.
You kick them out and maybe we will work on getting rid of our useless bushes.
2007-07-09 15:48:16 · answer #5 · answered by ambergail1 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am and a whole lot of British people. Because, royals are sometimes referred to as tourist attractions. And they are part of Britain's rich politics and history. And if times of political crisis occur, the monarch would save the government, run the government and form their governments.
2007-07-10 07:27:17 · answer #6 · answered by Jaime 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well they are the only European royal family left. I would think it was a bunch of balogna but we need to preserve our history. All of Europe used to have royalty and most of our history is based on their decisions. Can you imagine monarchs giving up their position just because it isn't modern enough. It may not be needed now but who knows what it will be like in a hundred years and something really bad happens (such as a nuclear war) they will have someone already in position to rule (unless of course they died too)
2007-07-09 13:54:55 · answer #7 · answered by Ten Commandments 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Charlie Windsor, the old Camel, Charlies Mum and Zorba, the Yorks and the thousands of flunkeys and hangers on who infest Buck and Clarence Houses are all dependent on theMonarchy for the weekly hand out..
2007-07-09 12:11:41 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
i'm not british or anything, i'm canadian, but i don't think royalty is necessary in britain either. the only thing is, the royal family has been around for ages, so you can't exactly just up and tell them they're not needed and throw them into the gutter...
2007-07-12 15:16:34 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree! What is the point of having so elderly lady and her son and grandsons' live in that beautiful house? All that they do is run up a huge food bill, and have the queen wave at people! There is no point to it!
2007-07-09 14:02:15 · answer #10 · answered by ... 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋