Why are people happy to be ruled by Kings and Queens from FOREIGN countries?

originally posted by: DISRAELI
Since they have no power, their origin really does not matter, does it?
Causes no harm. Complete storm in a tea-cup.

They must have at least the power to prevent the people from removing that financial burden. If you have to pay it, then that is harm to you. And they are not held accountable so their secrets will secret.

I can only think of brainwashed people who want that from their government.

originally posted by: alldaylong
What a load of cobblers.
The present Queens mother ( Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon ) has NO German blood, she is from pure 100% British stock.
The future king William ( Mother Lady Diana Spencer has NO German blood, pure 100% British stock), and his wife Kate Middleton , future Queen Of England ( who's mother is 100% pure British Stock)

So what point are you trying to make?

Read my posts more carefully. I never said anything about the background of the Queen's mother, nor the future king William.

a reply to: ThinkingHuman although they don't rule over us in anyway they give legitimacy to a hierarchical system which I profoundly disagree with.

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

Why the apparent obsession with the UK's Royal Family?

Do they affect you in any way, shape or form?

Yes, there is German blood in The Royal Family, but it can also trace its royal lineage directly back to King Alfred the Great back in 839.
www.britroyals.com...
I'd say that makes them pretty much at least as British as anyone else currently living on these islands.

Despite the testament of numerous people who actually live in the UK you seem to be under some misguided notion about the power and influence The Royal Family actually has.

I can understand why some Brits believe in the abolition of the monarchy and as I have stated in several threads here on ATS I myself would actively seek their removal if I ever thought they sought to exert undue influence over the governing of the UK, but they don't.

Oh, just wondering if you were considering a reply to any of the points raised here?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: ThinkingHuman

originally posted by: alldaylong
What a load of cobblers.
The present Queens mother ( Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon ) has NO German blood, she is from pure 100% British stock.
The future king William ( Mother Lady Diana Spencer has NO German blood, pure 100% British stock), and his wife Kate Middleton , future Queen Of England ( who's mother is 100% pure British Stock)

So what point are you trying to make?

Read my posts more carefully. I never said anything about the background of the Queen's mother, nor the future king William.

Your post was about British Royalty and their blood line was it not?
I have just given you examples of Royalty and their blood lines, that doesn't fit with your argument.

Those german royal figures weren't merely just germans running the show in the UK, but they were members of the Holy Roman Empire, which only closed shop and dissolved in 1806. However, just because they dismantled the Holy Roman Empire, doesn't mean those people just went away, they just melted behind the scenes and some are still calling the shots to this day. It amazes me how people blow off the Holy Roman Empire and all the royal families who served it.

a reply to: ArtemisE

I think its well documented that Royalty often indulged themselves with the lower classes.

Many bastards rose to positions of influence and were granted titles of their own.

I've never heard the archer story but I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if it were true.

originally posted by: CAPT PROTON
Those german royal figures weren't merely just germans running the show in the UK, but they were members of the Holy Roman Empire, which only closed shop and dissolved in 1806. However, just because they dismantled the Holy Roman Empire, doesn't mean those people just went away, they just melted behind the scenes and some are still calling the shots to this day. It amazes me how people blow off the Holy Roman Empire and all the royal families who served it.

What are you talking about?

Royals and the Catholics are a 100% No No

www.examiner.com...

Not many royalist folk supporting them in this thread, that is a positive sign to me lol

a reply to: Freeborn

..... does the monarchy affect you in any way, shape or form?
No it doesn't. I am not trying to stop it. I am just pointing out some odd fatcs about it. Should I not have the privilege to do that on this site?

..... apparent obsession with the UK's Royal Family?
Stress on 'apparent'. I don't approach this topic often. But you know the proverb "history is written by the victors", meaning that if you heard the other side of the story, you would get a different picture. Thus, there is much hidden from what we learn in school. So I try to look at historical data and try to understand what the data tells me that is different from what I was taught. Check my threads, I did something similar about US history, another one on jewish history, I may do one on Christian (two centuries of crusades) and possibly others. And I take my rosy glasses off for all of them.

..... focal point for national identity and cultural heritage?
..... zero impact or effect on me
Two points you are making seem in direct contradiction to each other. If it shapes your identity, is that zero impact? To me, this example illustrates how we are influenced and when being influenced we don't notice it. Imagine you float in a river, and the river makes a bend. You will also float around that curve but it will seem to you like you are floating in a straight line, unless you can fixed objects. Your identity will cause you to be willing to go to war, or to send your son. Very significant indeed.

..... it tends to be non-UK members who seem to be somewhat obsessed with The Royal Family
Non-UK people are just less influenced, thus more objective on this issue.

..... it was estimated in 2012 each person 52pence a year
If that is roughly 50 million pounds I agree, it's not the end of the world, if it's that important. (but I doubt the 50m is true)

..... quaint anachronism of a bygone era and are like a favourite eccentric Aunt who gets dusted off and brought out on special occasions
..... communal celebration
50 million pounds for communal celebration and some quaint anachronism? A holiday doesn't cost anything. Use the Mayor for an inauguration, some kids for returning soldiers, a choir to console flood victims.

..... third generation Pakistani's?
Even second. The bar is different for a head of State, where you want to be sure of the allegiance. I would think that it should be even higher and stricter for Royalty. How can they povide all those values when you don't know their values? For one thing, they show abhorrent arrogance with it.

..... Parliament is the legislative body
Yes, and I know her known functions are usually ceremonial. But how would you know if there was anything else, secret? Do you believe MI5 and MI6 keeps nothing secret? Like the type of things that were recently revealed about the NSA? You seem to voluntarily ask for your unelected officials to keep secrets from you in order to have a moment to feel good when she rolls by. You are entitled to that, it just doesn't seem like something a rational person would ask for it.

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: CAPT PROTON
It amazes me how people blow off the Holy Roman Empire and all the royal families who served it.

What are you talking about?
Royals and the Catholics are a 100% No No

The Holy Roman Empire wasn't Holy, it wasn't Roman, and it wasn't an Empire.

And the people were not Catholics.

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

Should I not have the privilege to do that on this site?

Of course you should and I welcome the opportunity to discuss this in a reasoned and respectful manner.
It just seems that this topic crops up with amazing regularity and its generally a non-Brit who starts the thread and those who appear virulently anti-monarchy also just happen to be from outside the UK.

I'm certainly not questioning your personal integrity just wondering why so many people seem to have this fascination with The Royal Family and why there seems to be a reluctance to acknowledge the testaments and opinions of people who actually live in the UK and form their own personal opinions on some misguided notion that we live as some sort of subservient serfs to a feudal absolute monarch.

Now I understand why some have issues regarding the monarchy but what I don't get is that some use their 'foreign' blood as an excuse for their dislike.
As has been clearly been shown the present monarch has significant 'genuine' British blood, probably more than the vast majority of British people - and William and his son will have even more 'real' British blood in them.

And I find it strange, and somewhat telling, that people seem fine with the idea of using The Queen's German ancestry as a justification for their dislike of the monarchy but don't apply the same level of bigotry against other Head's Of State - other Head's of State who by the way have far more actual political power and influence than the UK's Head of State has.
Two obvious examples of this are Obama in the US and Sarkozy who was until recently President of France.

The Queen has zero direct influence on me, my family and how we live our lives.
She can not implement new laws and doesn't determine financial or foreign policy.
In fact her duty to defer to the wishes and instructions from Parliament has made her complicit in the treasonous transfer of sovereignty to the EU - a topic for another thread methinks.

Liz doesn't shape our national identity, she serves as a focal point, or a symbol - nothing more, nothing less.
And her and her family do provide the occasional opportunity for people to forget about all the crap and the injustice etc and share a few communal drinks, connect with each other and have a bit of a party.

Your identity will cause you to be willing to go to war, or to send your son.

I suspect the days when the people of this country would go blindly into war are well and truly over - at least for the foreseeable future.
I recognise that those in power are very good at manipulating and play on people's national pride but we have been crapped on and misled too many times - hence Cameron not getting his own way on Syria.

..... third generation Pakistani's?
Even second. The bar is different for a head of State, where you want to be sure of the allegiance.

As I've said, I'm pretty much apathetic towards The Royal Family - in essence I disagree with the whole notion of gross inherited wealth and privilege but there are far bigger issues that face the UK at present and to be fair I think they've proven beyond doubt that their allegiance lies 100% with the UK and The Commonwealth.

I would think that it should be even higher and stricter for Royalty.

Why?
Should they be treat any different than any other Head of State?

...... For one thing, they show abhorrent arrogance with it.

Like all families there are good and bad.
There's a line that they shouldn't cross - if they do then they will go the same way as some of their ancestors.

To be honest I doubt Charles will be as submissive as his mother. There have been reports of him trying to influence government policy. I assure you, if he or any of his successors ever tries to unduly influence policies I personally would do everything within my power to see them removed. But I think there's probably enough safeguards in place to deal with that.
The last thing the people who really run this country want to see is a constitutional crisis and the subsequent upheaval that would go with it.
They are the one's who dwell in the real corridors of power and who set the agenda and are systematically trying to take this country back to something akin to a Victorian like society.

a reply to: alldaylong

Hah, only because of the Act of Settlement 1701.

But if you want to read the original document, its currently situated in the Lower Saxon State Archives Hanover, Germany.

Dang, how 'bout that... the document forbidding royals from marrying catholics to preserve their place in the line of succession to the royal throne in the UK, is in germany of all places. The plot thickens. Holy Roman Empire indeed.

Oh, and Holy Empire was added by Frederick I Barbossa because he had the ambition to dominate Italy and its Papacy, so its holy in name only. The empire's religions were Catholicism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism, so protestants were covered as well.

Most if not all the royals the world over are related

Well, the US is ruled by a King from a foreign country.




Sorry, I just had to say it.

The royals have brought their respective kingdoms thru the ages and have in a way earned the right to rule even if they are only figureheads in present times

originally posted by: Freeborn
its generally a non-Brit who starts the thread and those who appear virulently anti-monarchy also just happen to be from outside the UK.

their 'foreign' blood as an excuse for their dislike.

people seem fine with the idea of using The Queen's German ancestry as a justification for their dislike of the monarchy

her complicit in the treasonous transfer of sovereignty to the EU

I recognise that those in power are very good at manipulating and play on people's national pride but we have been crapped on and misled too many times.

Why are you making this an emotional issue? ("dislike") It's not for me. People in countries without a monarchy have experienced that life is just as good without the unnecessary burden of the monarchy, and thus naturally feel less attached to this emotional bonding. Why is this not a sufficient explanation for your issue with foreigners usually raising questions or stating facts about it? IMO you should embrace their input and perspective.

Just like I embrace comments and criticism about US politics from foreign perspectives. Criticize Bush and Obama all you want. But would I want to be 'ruled' by a foreigner? No, nor did the people in Ireland, nor those in former colonies. (Remember the time period that I addressed in my OP). Why did people in European monarchies not seem to mind at that time? (not just Britain)

The one thing I agree with is the "treasonous transfer of sovereignty to the EU". And while you recognize this, you don't seem to recognize the treasonous transfer of sovereignty (by and to) Royals from other countries. (Remember again the time period that I addressed in my OP).

History is repeating itself. Now that the era of such transfer by Royals across Europe is over, we use the EU to accomplish the same thing.

But these are hardly the only two examples of treasonous transfer of sovereignty. Forget about the Royals for a second and try to think of other examples of such transfer. Maybe giving China "most favored nation" (MFN) status by the US and the WTO in the 1990's will come to mind? What else will decrease the power and standard of living for "commoners" or workers in our respective countries?

Maybe "trade agreements" that are negotiated in secret which are really not about trading but about treasonous transfer of sovereignty to corporations. Have you heard about the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership? Or its sister agreement TPP? If not, look it up. Politicans give it nice sounding names, and then claim the trade will lead to economic benefits. But if you read the actual agreement, you'll get a rude awakening.
rt.com...

The US and Britain did not primarily invade two countries in the middle east, we invaded a corporate desert, now we planted our corporate seeds of influence. Not for the benefit of the commoners.

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

The day we the British public want them out is the day they will fade away but for now they are very popular, they are slaves btw to us the British people.
I wouldn't do what they do for all the tea in china.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
I wouldn't do what they do for all the tea in china.

Sure, you have the right to feel that way, but not even the first stone of "their" church, that they are the head of, will fall. People do mostly what is convenient and what is emotionally satisfying. Which makes them easy to control and brainwash.

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

I don't think the accusation of me making this an 'emotional issue' is accurate or even relevant.

I'm simply pointing out what I believe to be errors in your reasoning and offering a different and more of a first hand perspective - you are the one who seems reluctant to accept that this is a valid counterpoint to the questions and issues you raised in your OP.

As you correctly pointed out, this is a discussion board - if you didn't want people to offer different opinions to yours then perhaps you should have simply posted a blog somewhere.

On several occasions you say "Remember again the time period that I addressed in my OP".

Ok, lets look at your OP.

Thread Title;
"Why are people happy to be ruled by Kings and Queens from FOREIGN countries?"

Capital letter are yours, for emphasis I presume.

Notice how you are writing in the present, "are' as opposed to 'were'.
This by obvious extension implies we are talking about things in the present.

Now lets look at the next bit.
Hmm....well, for a starter it has been clearly shown that the people of the UK are most definitely NOT ruled by a King or Queen and the monarch which we have is no less British than the vast majority of UK citizens and can directly trace her 'British' ancestry back nearly 1,200 years or so.

As for the content of your OP, you highlight a period in time when several royal marriages occurred between members of the British Royal Family and various German royalty - bear in mind there was no such thing as a German nation as such at the time.
So what?
Apart from a relatively brief period in time they reigned from the UK and were decidedly British in outlook.
And on numerous occasions they quite clearly showed where there loyalty and allegiance lay - with the UK.

You then go on to say;

For two centuries all the Kings and Queens of Great Britain have been 100% German blood, all the way down to Victoria and her children.

That conveniently ignores the existing 'British' blood in the family line.

To this day, the British Royal family is of the German House. It was renamed “House of Windsor” to make it sound more British

It was changed in order to clearly show exactly where their loyalties and allegiance lay, something you accuse them of not doing.

So why do the British people revere their foreign Royalty?

Now here you are asking why do the British people revere their foreign Royalty now, not in some alleged specified time in the past but quite clearly NOW, in the present.
And its blatantly obvious judging by the responses in this thread, and in my humble opinion based on my 48 years of actually living in this country, we most definitely DO NOT revere The Royal Family be they foreign or not.

My answer is they are brainwashed.

Well, sorry to disappoint you but your answer is wrong.