Coronation of King Charles 3rd

Bluemanc100 said:
Yeah, bring on the day when we’ve lost the ability to be openly proud of our faith and our history…. The day when the country really will have gone to the dogs…

It’s on a downhill slope now but I’m glad that somebody will enjoy the fucking mess it eventually settles in
Click to expand...
Mess? How would you characterise our current situation?
 
hilts said:
I think it will change rather than disappear. Only a guess mind.
Click to expand...
Yes, I suppose it‘s far more likely to die a death of a thousand cuts rather than any particular single event. It will be forced to evolve to the point of irrelevance is the most likely outcome. I said at the time the passing of QE2 marked a seminal moment for the country and the monarchy, and as much as I enjoyed yesterday’s spectacle, I couldn’t escape from the notion that the event was as anachronistic and farcical, as it was spectacular and historic.

I think the fundamental issue for me is that this country has been held back in recent years by the institutions that once made it great. That a lack of change in those institutions has caused the country to ossify, and limit social mobility and necessary change, and the only way to properly address that is to rip those institutions down and start again. if I’m including our electoral and political systems in that equation, then it’s hard to argue against an institution that is founded upon hereditary entitlement and represents the antithesis to change.

I think in other times, such as WW2, the monarchy has provided stability, continuity and moderation when we have needed it, but that isn’t the case anymore.

The whole system is rotten and needs to be rebuilt, and for me, the monarchy needs to be part of that process.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Yes, I suppose it‘s far more likely to die a death of a thousand cuts rather than any particular single event. It will be forced to evolve to the point of irrelevance is the most likely outcome. I said at the time the passing of QE2 marked a seminal moment for the country and the monarchy, and as much as I enjoyed yesterday’s spectacle, I couldn’t escape from the notion that the event was as anachronistic and farcical, as it was spectacular and historic.

I think the fundamental issue for me is that this country has been held back in recent years by the institutions that once made it great. That a lack of change in those institutions has caused the country to ossify, and limit social mobility and necessary change, and the only way to properly address that is to rip those institutions down and start again. if I’m including our electoral and political systems in that equation, then it’s hard to argue against an institution that is founded upon hereditary entitlement and represents the antithesis to change.

I think in other times, such as WW2, the monarchy has provided stability, continuity and moderation when we have needed it, but that isn’t the case anymore.

The whole system is rotten and needs to be rebuilt, and for me, the monarchy needs to be part of that process.
Click to expand...
Can't argue with any of that. I would much prefer to start with our electoral and political institutions first mind. The monarchy doesn't really register with me. I am mightily fond of bank holidays mind.
 
hilts said:
Leaving the difficult complex decisions to the politicians then? Like the Tories for example? Voted in by the public including stupid folk.

We went into the EU following a referendum decided by the public including stupid folk.

Like I said daft as a brush so practice what you preach.
Click to expand...

Where have I said stupid folk shouldn't vote in GEs? Can you please quote where I've said that? You can't because you are the stupid one and wouldn't be very good at verbal reasoning given that you've completely made something up that wasn't in any of my posts and ran with it.

My initial point was highlighting how it's stupid that somebody thinks Penny should be the next Tory leader because she's holding a sword during a ceromony and its worrying this is the kind of shit people base their voting intentions in refs.
 
BlueMoonday said:
Where have I said stupid folk shouldn't vote in GEs? Can you please quote where I've said that? You can't because you are the stupid one and wouldn't be very good at verbal reasoning given that you've completely made something up that wasn't in any of my posts and ran with it.

My initial point was highlighting how it's stupid that somebody thinks Penny should be the next Tory leader because she's holding a sword during a ceromony and its worrying this is the kind of shit people base their voting intentions in refs.
Click to expand...
Your boring me now tbh if you can't see the connection between not allowing referendums because some people are stupid but want those decisions carried out by people elected by those same stupid people I can't help you.

Think we should leave it there.
 
Gray said:
Nobody does pageantry as good as the British.

Millions of pounds of tourist revenue flowing into the country due to the way we have preserved our history.
Click to expand...
There’s no doubt, some love it and lap it up.
For others however, it reinforces their own subjective preconceptions of why they want no part of it.
 
hilts said:
Your boring me now tbh if you can't see the connection between not allowing referendums because some people are stupid but want those decisions carried out by people elected by those same stupid people I can't help you.

Think we should leave it there.
Click to expand...

Ministers who've been voted in after a GE are the professionals and experts in implementing policy and making key decisions in their respective field on the behalf of the public. We rely on them as they're the experts and have the resources to implement policy.

In a ref, the public are the ones making that particular decision, there's quite a big difference.

I'd also add the voting system of FPTP in GE's is also less impactful than a straight yes/no vote. There's many wasted votes in the FPTP system.
 
lloydie said:
Click to expand...


So that’s 2 of the late Queen’s wishes Charles has ignored; the first one being that Camilla would hold the title Queen Consort - the media reported that the coronation invites referred to her as Queen Camilla and that has now stuck in the public consciousness.

The second - as reported in that article, is that Her Majesty had banned Andrew from wearing the garter robes but it seems ‘senior royals’ had agreed he could.
 
BlueMoonday said:
Ministers who've been voted in after a GE are the professionals and experts in implementing policy and making key decisions in their respective field on the behalf of the public. We rely on them as they're the experts and have the resources to implement policy.

In a ref, the public are the ones making that particular decision, there's quite a big difference.

I'd also add the voting system of FPTP in GE's is also less impactful than a straight yes/no vote. There's many wasted votes in the FPTP system.
Click to expand...

They rarely are tbh.
 
BlueMoonday said:
Ministers who've been voted in after a GE are the professionals and experts in implementing policy and making key decisions in their respective field on the behalf of the public. We rely on them as they're the experts and have the resources to implement policy.

In a ref, the public are the ones making that particular decision, there's quite a big difference.

I'd also add the voting system of FPTP in GE's is also less impactful than a straight yes/no vote. There's many wasted votes in the FPTP system.
Click to expand...
So much wrong with that. You have a lot more faith in minister's than I do. Anyhow like I said let's move on.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
They rarely are tbh.
Click to expand...
I agree but that's the theory. A lot of the members from the HoL are the experts due to their experience in a particular field and apply sensible input when it comes to passing a bill.
 
hilts said:
Can't argue with any of that. I would much prefer to start with our electoral and political institutions first mind. The monarchy doesn't really register with me. I am mightily fond of bank holidays mind.
Click to expand...

Agree completely on priorities. Though they represent something anachronistic, I suspect that if we could sort those other things out first there would actually be a window of opportunity for them to adapt whether they would be up for that, especially if it impacts on their wealth, who knows?
 
BlueMoonday said:
Ministers who've been voted in after a GE are the professionals and experts in implementing policy and making key decisions in their respective field on the behalf of the public. We rely on them as they're the experts and have the resources to implement policy.
Click to expand...
Ministers don’t get voted in. They get appointed based principally on their adherence to a particular political viewpoint, not their ability.

To suggest they are experts simply by virtue of that system is utterly absurd.
 
Mayor West said:
Genuine question, why are you so angry that some people enjoy something you don't? Do you really expect every single person on earth to think the same as you or else you'll go on pathetic rants about why you're right and we're wrong? It's really weird to be honest.
Click to expand...
Funny how this moron never replied to this
 
BlueMoonday said:
Ministers who've been voted in after a GE are the professionals and experts in implementing policy and making key decisions in their respective field on the behalf of the public. We rely on them as they're the experts and have the resources to implement policy.

In a ref, the public are the ones making that particular decision, there's quite a big difference.

I'd also add the voting system of FPTP in GE's is also less impactful than a straight yes/no vote. There's many wasted votes in the FPTP system.
Click to expand...

MPs are not experts in their field. Civil servants that support them are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top