It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should The United Kingdom Become a Republic?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by thoughtsfull
 


You Cornish crack me up lol. I haven't heard much about your independance movement lately run out of barns to burn




posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rocketman1
reply to post by thoughtsfull
 


You Cornish crack me up lol. I haven't heard much about your independance movement lately run out of barns to burn


No... am South Saxon/Sussex


My avatar is of the Seven Sisters take from Cuckmere Haven and looking towards Gods waiting room


It's just in my wilder moments it seems like a good idea to cut the boar loose and see what happens.. but that is probably because I have a sick sense of humour


The Sussex part is probably also why I'd like to see the capital back in Winchester and separate the City of London corporation from our governance


ETA: tho we have been known to partial to a little bit of barn burning (Swing Riots) however in the modern age it now takes the form of blowing up pay and display meters


Exploding meters, parking vigilantes and a suspicious silence in a sleepy Sussex town
Since the article was written the number is up to 400


edit on 13/1/11 by thoughtsfull because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Absolutely, the UK should become a republic. In a supposedly egalitarian age why the hell am I the Queens', or anybody's, subject? There is NO justification for the monarchy whatsoever.

PLEASE read this if you think otherwise.
edit on 13-1-2011 by theoneeyedman because: typo



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by theoneeyedman
Absolutely, the UK should become a republic. In a supposedly egalitarian age why the hell am I the Queens', or anybodys, subject? There is NO justification for the monarchy whatsoever.

PLEASE read this if you think otherwise.


The only problem I have is someone like Tony Blair becoming president
and those are the types of people who end up in those types of role.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Crutchley29
 


Isnt the closest part of America closer to us than the furthest part of Euorpe is? I say sack europe, they have done nothing but cause us problems over the years.

And as for keeping the queen? no thank you, I dont believe in god so how can I agree that god chose their family to rule over the rest of us.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by thoughtsfull
 


Well then don't vote for someone like that then! You're either for democracy (warts and all) or you're not. To have a real democracy we need an elected Head of State, not someone who assumes the role as a birthright. If you don't like the idea of elections then please drop any pretence of believing in democracy.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ThePeopleParty
 


But its easy to say get rid of them. But what would you replace it with. I mean surely the reason the E.U cant sell itself to the people of Europe is because it doesnt mean anything to us. Havent we eroded enough of our culture as it is, last time i went to london i couldn't find a fish'n'chip shop. Now im sure that in itself isn't going to lead to the break down of society, but it's still kinda weird.
edit on 13-1-2011 by Rocketman1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman1
 


I do get where you are coming from. But I just cant agree that someone should be born into power. Imo Its just not right in this day and age. Id rather us run our selves through an x factor type voting system than have the queen in charge.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by theoneeyedman
reply to post by thoughtsfull
 


Well then don't vote for someone like that then! You're either for democracy (warts and all) or you're not. To have a real democracy we need an elected Head of State, not someone who assumes the role as a birthright. If you don't like the idea of elections then please drop any pretence of believing in democracy.


I never said I wanted a true democracy or that I supported the Royals, I just prefer the system we have in comparison to the alternative.. you might feel it is right, which is cool, but it is not a system I agree with.

I would fight against a Republic (but not for the monarchy) as the whole premise of out with the old and in with the new reminds me to much of the previous attempt.

edit on 13/1/11 by thoughtsfull because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Deleted rant

edit on 13/1/11 by thoughtsfull because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
To me it just seems so strange that a very average family can get away living in such pomp and privilege,, owning swathes of the country and expecting us to pay towards their up keep. Does anyone deserve to live like this , just due to be born in the right family? Realistically the best we can hope for is William becoming king and toning the whole thing down and modernising their role. Although I wont hold my breath on that one. Ithink Charles is quite determined to be King.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
To me it just seems so strange that a very average family can get away living in such pomp and privilege,, owning swathes of the country and expecting us to pay towards their up keep. Does anyone deserve to live like this , just due to be born in the right family? Realistically the best we can hope for is William becoming king and toning the whole thing down and modernising their role. Although I wont hold my breath on that one. Ithink Charles is quite determined to be King.


Most of the Royal property is held in trust through the crown Estate and other Organisations, the money from these estates vastly outweighs the cost of the civil list.

www.thecrownestate.co.uk...

en.wikipedia.org...

While the Royal's are very wealthy, in truth they are not ridiculously rich. Buckingham palace and most of the famous residences are working households containing offices and staff. Even if we had a elected President they would more than likely reside in Buck house, and i doubt they would live in any less splendour or cost us less money. And like it or not, getting rid of the Monarchy does not mean people wouldn't be born into extreme wealth. To stop this we would need to move towards a Communist society, this i would fight against.

“Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have so much.'”
edit on 13-1-2011 by Rocketman1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Just remember my brethren across the pond, in a democracy the people are sheep.

In a Republic, the sheep have guns.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rocketman1

Originally posted by woodwardjnr

“Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have so much.'”
edit on 13-1-2011 by Rocketman1 because: (no reason given)


I would say you have been brainwashed by your Capitalist system if you believe such nonsense.
edit on 14-1-2011 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:20 AM
link   
For those of you with the time, read the modern histories of those countries with monarchs, and those countries without, such as Germany, Russia, France, Italy,(as is now) there is a huge difference, its a matter of stability.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:42 AM
link   
In my opinion there is no greater representation of the tremendous injustice in this world, than our Royal family. Arguing that they bring in money...so what? Is that all that matters? We complain about the crooked banking system and then defend this disgraceful ruling class pageantry via the most vulgar of terms. Selling weapons to third-world dictators will make us money.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman1
 


Hey OP, it may also help if you define what you mean by Republic. As far as I know, you guys have a type of Republic already.

A Republic is usually defined as a form of government that at it's base is a Constitution that protects the rights of the individual from the collective majority. Maybe a link to a breakdown of what you mean or your description.

You could have a Republic with a direct democracy even. Just saying.

edit to add-I know the basic definition is just a form without a monarchy and is based on the power of government being in the people, but that is not very descriptive.
edit on 14-1-2011 by saltheart foamfollower because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 

Really im just asking where people think we should be heading in general, would like to get peoples opinions, even if its a state lead by a priest of satan
.
Monarchy is just one example of our government and state that people feel passionately about.
edit on 14-1-2011 by Rocketman1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
I'm Irish but take a close interest in Britains affairs. Would there be any real point in changing the monarchy for a president? Neither would have much power. In Ireland, we got rid of the British monarchy for obvious historical reasons, but our president is basically powerless, despite being head of the army and having to sign off bills that go through government. In reality, all she does is rubberstamp the deals, and takes trips abroad to promote Ireland.

Also, if the UK was going to switch to a republic, would it also call into question the existence of the UK itself, with possible independence referendums to break up the UK into the independent countries? I think Scotland is having an independence referendum in the near future, what would this mean for the UK as a whole if it was passed?



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by MortlitantiFMMJ
 



I agree that it would call into question the unity of the Kingdom. The only reason we have a U.K is because of King James I.without him i think the Scotosh would never have joined the U.K. N.I and Wales are clearly very different situations and i doubt would move towards independance, but Scotland always seems to be in two minds as it is.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join