koan;1384678 wrote: There's nothing big about watching it?
What an odd thing to say.
Anyway, the Royal Family is given its authority by "God" wherein lies another problem with having them as head of state in a modern country.
The "Divine Right of Kings" argument ended with the first Charlie so it's several hundred years since that's been true.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Divine right is the root of the system and that's what most people who love the queen have in mind as how she got there.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1384685 wrote: Divine right is the root of the system and that's what most people who love the queen have in mind as how she got there.
Nah, divine right is the origin of the system but no longer the root of it. We have moved on from Absolute Monarchy to Constitutional Monarch which is a totally different animal built with a different stripe.
Nah, divine right is the origin of the system but no longer the root of it. We have moved on from Absolute Monarchy to Constitutional Monarch which is a totally different animal built with a different stripe.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
It reinforces that there are different classes of people and that those classes can be defined by birth.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Here's my idea for a better structure:
Decentralize government. Elect a diplomatic figurehead chosen from the published intellectual community or other qualifications that show them to be quality representatives of the direction of humanity. People like Noam Chomsky, David Suzuki, etc
Decentralize government. Elect a diplomatic figurehead chosen from the published intellectual community or other qualifications that show them to be quality representatives of the direction of humanity. People like Noam Chomsky, David Suzuki, etc
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1384678 wrote: Anyway, the Royal Family is given its authority by "God" wherein lies another problem with having them as head of state in a modern country.
Only to those few ideologue fanatics who insist it's so. The rest of us regard her authority as resting on a constitutional agreement of 1688 and the rules of succession set down in 1705.
They were odd rules, those of the succession, and they were amended in 1948 when it was realized that if they stayed permanently then there would come a day when every living human on the planet was a naturalized British citizen by right of descent from Queen Sophia (a fecund European lady).
Only to those few ideologue fanatics who insist it's so. The rest of us regard her authority as resting on a constitutional agreement of 1688 and the rules of succession set down in 1705.
They were odd rules, those of the succession, and they were amended in 1948 when it was realized that if they stayed permanently then there would come a day when every living human on the planet was a naturalized British citizen by right of descent from Queen Sophia (a fecund European lady).
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1384660 wrote: So, if you like the status quo, you're more likely to keep it with a royal family.I'd say that's better than a complete degeneration of the whole world, which, it seems, is the route we're headed. I suppose that's why everyone is discussing it
koan;1384660 wrote: Still. The prime ministers govern the country and the queen does nothing to interfere with their actions so... she may have morals but we don't rightly know.I'd also say that having competition among decision makers is as complementary to a just society than any. Without the King, or Queen standing above then, at the very least, there wouldn't be a point of question as to how the prime minister leads, and that's far better than not i.e George W Bush the mess that he was
koan;1384660 wrote: Still. The prime ministers govern the country and the queen does nothing to interfere with their actions so... she may have morals but we don't rightly know.I'd also say that having competition among decision makers is as complementary to a just society than any. Without the King, or Queen standing above then, at the very least, there wouldn't be a point of question as to how the prime minister leads, and that's far better than not i.e George W Bush the mess that he was
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1384693 wrote: Here's my idea for a better structure:
Decentralize government. Elect a diplomatic figurehead chosen from the published intellectual community or other qualifications that show them to be quality representatives of the direction of humanity. People like Noam Chomsky, David Suzuki, etc
I have given a suggestion. The Queen is replaced by a person who earns the respect through their works. I have no problem with such a person staying in the position currently held by a monarch until they decided to step down.
Decentralize government. Elect a diplomatic figurehead chosen from the published intellectual community or other qualifications that show them to be quality representatives of the direction of humanity. People like Noam Chomsky, David Suzuki, etc
I have given a suggestion. The Queen is replaced by a person who earns the respect through their works. I have no problem with such a person staying in the position currently held by a monarch until they decided to step down.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Like a Pope do you mean ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Bruv;1384763 wrote: Like a Pope do you mean ?
No. Like a Queen. But not decided by birth.
No. Like a Queen. But not decided by birth.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
But the position is a full-time burden, just like the Papacy but without the power. What sane person would accept it?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
How does this non Queen/King get the position ?
Who judges who to give such a position to ?
No......sorry.....so much easier to keep it as it is.
Who judges who to give such a position to ?
No......sorry.....so much easier to keep it as it is.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
The Queen Is Ridiculous
We don't advance by taking the easy road all the time.
I'm personally against having a figurehead who has little or nothing to do with the running of the country sitting in a lush haven somewhere completely out of touch with the world. I'm just saying that, if traditionalists insist the position is important, it should be assigned based on merit and not handed down by birth.
I'm personally against having a figurehead who has little or nothing to do with the running of the country sitting in a lush haven somewhere completely out of touch with the world. I'm just saying that, if traditionalists insist the position is important, it should be assigned based on merit and not handed down by birth.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1384843 wrote: We don't advance by taking the easy road all the time.
I'm personally against having a figurehead who has little or nothing to do with the running of the country sitting in a lush haven somewhere completely out of touch with the world. I'm just saying that, if traditionalists insist the position is important, it should be assigned based on merit and not handed down by birth.
I think you just admitted you don't 'Get it'.
I'm personally against having a figurehead who has little or nothing to do with the running of the country sitting in a lush haven somewhere completely out of touch with the world. I'm just saying that, if traditionalists insist the position is important, it should be assigned based on merit and not handed down by birth.
I think you just admitted you don't 'Get it'.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1384843 wrote: We don't advance by taking the easy road all the time.
I'm personally against having a figurehead who has little or nothing to do with the running of the country sitting in a lush haven somewhere completely out of touch with the world. I'm just saying that, if traditionalists insist the position is important, it should be assigned based on merit and not handed down by birth.
The more worthy the assignee, the more attention will be paid if he or she comments on the political process. A head of state who's involved in the political process challenges the primacy of the parliamentary system. We (Canada, China and the UK, among others) have a parliamentary system which your reform would damage. Other countries (the US, North Korea and Russia, among others) have political heads of state. I prefer the way we do things.
I'm personally against having a figurehead who has little or nothing to do with the running of the country sitting in a lush haven somewhere completely out of touch with the world. I'm just saying that, if traditionalists insist the position is important, it should be assigned based on merit and not handed down by birth.
The more worthy the assignee, the more attention will be paid if he or she comments on the political process. A head of state who's involved in the political process challenges the primacy of the parliamentary system. We (Canada, China and the UK, among others) have a parliamentary system which your reform would damage. Other countries (the US, North Korea and Russia, among others) have political heads of state. I prefer the way we do things.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Sorry, but the only difference between the way Canada is run and the way the US is run is that we call people different titles and don't get to vote directly for the president. Stephen Harper is our wimpy Obama. He runs his government unfettered by the queen. The queen has such little effect on our country that few people would be worried if she died with no heir. It would be a celebrity event without any memorable songs.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
The Governor General here does dick all. It's all ceremony.
I don't think we should elect an intellectual or cultural leader to replace the Queen. I'm only suggesting it to placate the sort of people who enjoy idolizing figureheads. What I'm really against is the idea that anyone in the modern world is given respect and social status purely by accident of birth.
I don't think we should elect an intellectual or cultural leader to replace the Queen. I'm only suggesting it to placate the sort of people who enjoy idolizing figureheads. What I'm really against is the idea that anyone in the modern world is given respect and social status purely by accident of birth.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Retaining the hereditary monarchy avoids crises like BBC News - German President Wulff quits in home loan scandal
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
The main concern is limiting power. The secondary concern is creating a sense of identity and security.
The Queen doesn't limit power as she doesn't function politically. The secondary concern can be acquired in other ways besides reinforcing the idea of a caste system defined by birth.
Clinging to illusions will not fix problems. There are problems. Old thinking must give way to something new. Start thinking new instead of clinging.
The Queen doesn't limit power as she doesn't function politically. The secondary concern can be acquired in other ways besides reinforcing the idea of a caste system defined by birth.
Clinging to illusions will not fix problems. There are problems. Old thinking must give way to something new. Start thinking new instead of clinging.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385039 wrote: The Queen doesn't limit power as she doesn't function politically.I'm not sure where that notion comes from but it's quite wrong. The triggers for her political intervention haven't arisen since she ascended the throne but they definitely exist.
There is, for example, an entire secondary system of governance to be invoked in time of civil disaster, should central government functions fail, in which the Queen through her Lords Lieutenant in each county takes direct control of both the civil and military resources of a region. All of the constitutional arrangements under which the monarch has the power to intervene but chooses not to do so still exist in order that they can, at the last resort, be pulled back into being and that the infrastructure remains for her to be informed and to act.
The idea of putting some popular icon into such a position, instead of a hereditary monarch with a lifetime's training for that role, would be a bit daft.
There is, for example, an entire secondary system of governance to be invoked in time of civil disaster, should central government functions fail, in which the Queen through her Lords Lieutenant in each county takes direct control of both the civil and military resources of a region. All of the constitutional arrangements under which the monarch has the power to intervene but chooses not to do so still exist in order that they can, at the last resort, be pulled back into being and that the infrastructure remains for her to be informed and to act.
The idea of putting some popular icon into such a position, instead of a hereditary monarch with a lifetime's training for that role, would be a bit daft.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
What did she do when her subjects were rioting in the streets?
What is she doing while Stephen Harper is withdrawing from Kyoto and pounding the drums of the oil sands against the wishes of the Canadian public? What has she done for you lately? What would she do if Harper privatizes the jail system in Canada and increases punishment for nonviolent crimes? How is she stopping tyranny in the world? I just don't see anything but a hanky waiving old woman and bunch of inbreds waiting to take her place.
And in the meantime... she's interfering with the idea that all people are created equal.
Explain to me why her position can't be filled by someone else.
Her position is currently filled by someone else in Canada: The Governor General
Yet the affiliation of the Governor General position with the Queen still maintains the idea that a person is born royal for a reason.
What is she doing while Stephen Harper is withdrawing from Kyoto and pounding the drums of the oil sands against the wishes of the Canadian public? What has she done for you lately? What would she do if Harper privatizes the jail system in Canada and increases punishment for nonviolent crimes? How is she stopping tyranny in the world? I just don't see anything but a hanky waiving old woman and bunch of inbreds waiting to take her place.
And in the meantime... she's interfering with the idea that all people are created equal.
Explain to me why her position can't be filled by someone else.
Her position is currently filled by someone else in Canada: The Governor General
Yet the affiliation of the Governor General position with the Queen still maintains the idea that a person is born royal for a reason.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
What has she done for you lately?
Made a thought provoking thread to chew over ?
Made a thought provoking thread to chew over ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385068 wrote: Explain to me why her position can't be filled by someone else.
I did but you waltzed past it without thinking of the implications: "The idea of putting some popular icon into such a position, instead of a hereditary monarch with a lifetime's training for that role, would be a bit daft".
Her position is currently filled by someone else in Canada: The Governor General
But it isn't. The Governor General is her representative, not the Canadian head of state. The Queen's the Canadian head of state. It's the same in the English counties, the Lords Lieutenant are the Queen's representatives and in her absence, when occasion demands, they stand in for her physically and make on-the-spot decisions on her behalf. They project her power, they possess none in their own right.
I did but you waltzed past it without thinking of the implications: "The idea of putting some popular icon into such a position, instead of a hereditary monarch with a lifetime's training for that role, would be a bit daft".
Her position is currently filled by someone else in Canada: The Governor General
But it isn't. The Governor General is her representative, not the Canadian head of state. The Queen's the Canadian head of state. It's the same in the English counties, the Lords Lieutenant are the Queen's representatives and in her absence, when occasion demands, they stand in for her physically and make on-the-spot decisions on her behalf. They project her power, they possess none in their own right.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385068 wrote: What did she do when her subjects were rioting in the streets?
What is she doing while Stephen Harper is withdrawing from Kyoto and pounding the drums of the oil sands against the wishes of the Canadian public? What has she done for you lately? What would she do if Harper privatizes the jail system in Canada and increases punishment for nonviolent crimes? How is she stopping tyranny in the world? I just don't see anything but a hanky waiving old woman and bunch of inbreds waiting to take her place.
And in the meantime... she's interfering with the idea that all people are created equal.
Explain to me why her position can't be filled by someone else.
Her position is currently filled by someone else in Canada: The Governor General
Yet the affiliation of the Governor General position with the Queen still maintains the idea that a person is born royal for a reason.
She's a figurehead with no real power, if she tried to interfere directly it's unlikely the monarchy would last very long. She's not interfering with the idea all people are created equal, no one with half a brain takes the notion some are born to rule seriously. the last king that put that forward seriously had his head chopped off. Indeed monarchies that didn't change didn't last. With us it's a tradition that has grown over time, if it's working don't fix it. Why don't you sort your own problems in Canada instead of wanting some hanky waving OAP to do it for you? What is the Canadian public doing about steven harper - why do they keep electing him? Why did they let the oil sands project go through? I think it's going to take the inevitable, irreversible ecological disaster before people wake up to the long term damage we ae doing to our environment. It will happen in the states first I reckon, probably already has.
Once the scots get independence we are going to confiscate all her lands and kick out foreign landowners. (sssh that's a secret)
What is she doing while Stephen Harper is withdrawing from Kyoto and pounding the drums of the oil sands against the wishes of the Canadian public? What has she done for you lately? What would she do if Harper privatizes the jail system in Canada and increases punishment for nonviolent crimes? How is she stopping tyranny in the world? I just don't see anything but a hanky waiving old woman and bunch of inbreds waiting to take her place.
And in the meantime... she's interfering with the idea that all people are created equal.
Explain to me why her position can't be filled by someone else.
Her position is currently filled by someone else in Canada: The Governor General
Yet the affiliation of the Governor General position with the Queen still maintains the idea that a person is born royal for a reason.
She's a figurehead with no real power, if she tried to interfere directly it's unlikely the monarchy would last very long. She's not interfering with the idea all people are created equal, no one with half a brain takes the notion some are born to rule seriously. the last king that put that forward seriously had his head chopped off. Indeed monarchies that didn't change didn't last. With us it's a tradition that has grown over time, if it's working don't fix it. Why don't you sort your own problems in Canada instead of wanting some hanky waving OAP to do it for you? What is the Canadian public doing about steven harper - why do they keep electing him? Why did they let the oil sands project go through? I think it's going to take the inevitable, irreversible ecological disaster before people wake up to the long term damage we ae doing to our environment. It will happen in the states first I reckon, probably already has.
Once the scots get independence we are going to confiscate all her lands and kick out foreign landowners. (sssh that's a secret)
The Queen Is Ridiculous
gmc;1385395 wrote: Once the scots get independence we are going to confiscate all her lands and kick out foreign landowners. (sssh that's a secret)A return to a bit of Clydebank Socialism wouldn't go amiss either.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
spot;1385075 wrote: I did but you waltzed past it without thinking of the implications: "The idea of putting some popular icon into such a position, instead of a hereditary monarch with a lifetime's training for that role, would be a bit daft".
But it isn't. The Governor General is her representative, not the Canadian head of state. The Queen's the Canadian head of state. It's the same in the English counties, the Lords Lieutenant are the Queen's representatives and in her absence, when occasion demands, they stand in for her physically and make on-the-spot decisions on her behalf. They project her power, they possess none in their own right.
I didn't "waltz" past it. I responded that if people wanted a mascot so badly there were lots of willing bodies.
gmc- I've spent much of this week stunned at finding out what a lot of people believe. Think about how many people believe the queen is an alien of the lizard race then think about how many believe she is superior by right of birth. I'd wager more believe in the inequality than in the alien yet the alien believers are vast.
But it isn't. The Governor General is her representative, not the Canadian head of state. The Queen's the Canadian head of state. It's the same in the English counties, the Lords Lieutenant are the Queen's representatives and in her absence, when occasion demands, they stand in for her physically and make on-the-spot decisions on her behalf. They project her power, they possess none in their own right.
I didn't "waltz" past it. I responded that if people wanted a mascot so badly there were lots of willing bodies.
gmc- I've spent much of this week stunned at finding out what a lot of people believe. Think about how many people believe the queen is an alien of the lizard race then think about how many believe she is superior by right of birth. I'd wager more believe in the inequality than in the alien yet the alien believers are vast.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385411 wrote: I didn't "waltz" past it. I responded that if people wanted a mascot so badly there were lots of willing bodies. But the position isn't suited to a willing body, that's my point. Willing bodies have skeletons in closets, willing bodies have agendas, willing bodies don't play by the rules.
Monarchy is as close to being a life sentence as anything I can think of, it's not a task I'd willingly undertake and neither would any other rational person. The existing family does it out of a sense of duty to the nation, it's a burdensome task they inherited.
Monarchy is as close to being a life sentence as anything I can think of, it's not a task I'd willingly undertake and neither would any other rational person. The existing family does it out of a sense of duty to the nation, it's a burdensome task they inherited.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
You've yet to prove that people want the mascot. You've jumped to make me argue about who it should be without convincing me there need be one. That is my reluctance to continue arguing about the who when the if is not decided.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
What we need, in that case, is a set of popularity polls drawn from a sufficiently wide constituency as to be meaningful. I assume they'd say that, for example, the majority of adult Canadians are in favour of retaining the Queen as head of state, just as the British would of Britain and the New Zealanders of New Zealand and the Gibraltarians of Gibraltar. Are you then going to argue that they're ignorant and led by propaganda?
I'm glad we've dropped this thing about making the post elective though, that's sheer political madness unless you want your head of state to make policy like the Americans and Russians and North Koreans and Syrians do.
I'm glad we've dropped this thing about making the post elective though, that's sheer political madness unless you want your head of state to make policy like the Americans and Russians and North Koreans and Syrians do.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Our prime minister does make policy just like the president of the USA. He is our head of state in everything but name. That the queen has the title makes not one whit of difference to how our country is run except for that it costs us a lot of money for the Governor General. For all purposes, the prime minister has all the same abilities as the president of the United States. The queen does a royal diddly squat to limit his power. How you can insist it be any different astounds me, especially after stating quite clearly that you think the value of the queen is that she does not take any political action. The one legitimate argument you have that you haven't yet stated is that the Governor General has the authority to force a Prime Minister to step down if they try to resist removal by vote. That role can easily be replaced.
The Canadian polls are here
The queen has not garnered more than 38% support for a long time and a portion of those people don't want a monarch after Elizabeth II. 31% of Canadians actually want the Royal Family to stop bloody visiting Canada at all!
The Canadian polls are here
The queen has not garnered more than 38% support for a long time and a portion of those people don't want a monarch after Elizabeth II. 31% of Canadians actually want the Royal Family to stop bloody visiting Canada at all!
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Yes your prime minister does make policy just like the president of the USA but he isn't your head of state, that's the entire point of a constitutional monarchy.
Here - I was reading Trotsky's autobiography earlier and saw this. A hundred years ago in London and his incredulity at the baffling English is no different to yours, you can hear his "where on earth do they find these people"...One Sunday I went with Lenin and Krupskaya to a Social Democratic meeting in a church, where speeches alternated with the singing of hymns. The principal speaker was a compositor who had just returned from Australia. He spoke of the Social revolution. Then everybody rose and sang: “Lord Almighty, let there be no more kings or rich men!” I could scarcely believe my eyes or ears.
Here - I was reading Trotsky's autobiography earlier and saw this. A hundred years ago in London and his incredulity at the baffling English is no different to yours, you can hear his "where on earth do they find these people"...One Sunday I went with Lenin and Krupskaya to a Social Democratic meeting in a church, where speeches alternated with the singing of hymns. The principal speaker was a compositor who had just returned from Australia. He spoke of the Social revolution. Then everybody rose and sang: “Lord Almighty, let there be no more kings or rich men!” I could scarcely believe my eyes or ears.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Ever seen Spinal Tap? You basically just keep saying "yes... but this one goes to eleven!"
I gave you statistics.
I gave you statistics.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385562 wrote: Ever seen Spinal Tap? You basically just keep saying "yes... but this one goes to eleven!"Not at all - the difference between our points of view is that you regard "he is our head of state in everything but name" as meaning they're very like, and I regard it as saying they're entirely different. We have a different picture of what a constitutional monarch is for. My picture, it goes without saying, is the more accurate.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385511 wrote: Our prime minister does make policy just like the president of the USA. He is our head of state in everything but name. That the queen has the title makes not one whit of difference to how our country is run except for that it costs us a lot of money for the Governor General. For all purposes, the prime minister has all the same abilities as the president of the United States. The queen does a royal diddly squat to limit his power. How you can insist it be any different astounds me, especially after stating quite clearly that you think the value of the queen is that she does not take any political action. The one legitimate argument you have that you haven't yet stated is that the Governor General has the authority to force a Prime Minister to step down if they try to resist removal by vote. That role can easily be replaced.
The Canadian polls are here
The queen has not garnered more than 38% support for a long time and a portion of those people don't want a monarch after Elizabeth II. 31% of Canadians actually want the Royal Family to stop bloody visiting Canada at all!
From the link you put up :-
It has been estimated that only 0.6% of the population is actively engaged in any debate about a republic.
says it all really.
Percentage for and against in a poll of a disinterested group does not really signify much of anything.
The Canadian polls are here
The queen has not garnered more than 38% support for a long time and a portion of those people don't want a monarch after Elizabeth II. 31% of Canadians actually want the Royal Family to stop bloody visiting Canada at all!
From the link you put up :-
It has been estimated that only 0.6% of the population is actively engaged in any debate about a republic.
says it all really.
Percentage for and against in a poll of a disinterested group does not really signify much of anything.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Right. But sometimes the public goes from not being engaged to a few people trying to engage them and then, all of a sudden, people are engaged.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
spot;1385563 wrote: Not at all - the difference between our points of view is that you regard "he is our head of state in everything but name" as meaning they're very like, and I regard it as saying they're entirely different. We have a different picture of what a constitutional monarch is for. My picture, it goes without saying, is the more accurate.
I'm not getting how you can have it both ways: The Queen is great because she stays out of politics. And the Queen is great because she plays an important political role.
Who is she preventing? You compare England to North Korea and claim the Queen is the only difference. That's disingenuous.
I'm not getting how you can have it both ways: The Queen is great because she stays out of politics. And the Queen is great because she plays an important political role.
Who is she preventing? You compare England to North Korea and claim the Queen is the only difference. That's disingenuous.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385569 wrote: Right. But sometimes the public goes from not being engaged to a few people trying to engage them and then, all of a sudden, people are engaged.
Surely - but which side they come down on once they're engaged is not determined by what shows in prior polls. That's the point I was trying to make.
Surely - but which side they come down on once they're engaged is not determined by what shows in prior polls. That's the point I was trying to make.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385571 wrote: I'm not getting how you can have it both ways: The Queen is great because she stays out of politics. And the Queen is great because she plays an important political role.
Who is she preventing? You compare England to North Korea and claim the Queen is the only difference. That's disingenuous.
That's like saying that someone who chooses not to fight under normal circumstances is incapable of fighting when the need is there.
The important political role is one of potential - she stays out of politics in the normal course of events but has the potential to intervene when necessary.
Who is she preventing? You compare England to North Korea and claim the Queen is the only difference. That's disingenuous.
That's like saying that someone who chooses not to fight under normal circumstances is incapable of fighting when the need is there.
The important political role is one of potential - she stays out of politics in the normal course of events but has the potential to intervene when necessary.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
what sort of fight would call her to action?
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385579 wrote: what sort of fight would call her to action?
I'm often asked to design my computer systems so that they can survive any possible bug that might be introduced. It is, of course, impossible - you cannot foresee every possible state in systems above a certain level of complexity.
So to your question, in normal circumstances I cannot see any situation where she would be called into action but her position is one of the checks and balances built into the system to allow it to react to the unforeseen.
The value of such checks and balances is not in their use but in their existence.
I'm often asked to design my computer systems so that they can survive any possible bug that might be introduced. It is, of course, impossible - you cannot foresee every possible state in systems above a certain level of complexity.
So to your question, in normal circumstances I cannot see any situation where she would be called into action but her position is one of the checks and balances built into the system to allow it to react to the unforeseen.
The value of such checks and balances is not in their use but in their existence.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Our Governor General increased their budget by over 70% recently. It sparked debate about the position. A commission advised that Canada reconsider the usefulness of the GG. I expect it to become a bigger issue here very soon.
Canadians would like to see the head of state be a Canadian. Whether or not they are engaged in the debate they do have opinions and it seems that Elizabeth II is the last monarch Canadians are willing to put up with. In these times of riots, financial crisis, and environmental emergency, I think the tolerance for "royalty" is wearing thin.
Canadians would like to see the head of state be a Canadian. Whether or not they are engaged in the debate they do have opinions and it seems that Elizabeth II is the last monarch Canadians are willing to put up with. In these times of riots, financial crisis, and environmental emergency, I think the tolerance for "royalty" is wearing thin.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385571 wrote: You compare England to North Korea and claim the Queen is the only difference. That's disingenuous.On a point of information, no I didn't. Korea is currently in a frozen state of civil war which has yet to be resolved. The governments of both North and South each claim jurisdiction over the whole of the Korean nation as it existed before the civil war started. The different circumstances between Korea and England extend far beyond their constitutions.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Bryn Mawr;1385580 wrote: I'm often asked to design my computer systems so that they can survive any possible bug that might be introduced. It is, of course, impossible - you cannot foresee every possible state in systems above a certain level of complexity.
So to your question, in normal circumstances I cannot see any situation where she would be called into action but her position is one of the checks and balances built into the system to allow it to react to the unforeseen.
The value of such checks and balances is not in their use but in their existence.
To go with computer analogies, I'm suggesting open source is better than microsoft with all their royalties.
So to your question, in normal circumstances I cannot see any situation where she would be called into action but her position is one of the checks and balances built into the system to allow it to react to the unforeseen.
The value of such checks and balances is not in their use but in their existence.
To go with computer analogies, I'm suggesting open source is better than microsoft with all their royalties.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
koan;1385606 wrote: To go with computer analogies, I'm suggesting open source is better than microsoft with all their royalties.
Would you care to explain the implications of that analogy - I don't see it.
Would you care to explain the implications of that analogy - I don't see it.
The Queen Is Ridiculous
Aside from the analogy trying to point out that comparing a computer system to a social structure for human beings isn't really appropriate... It's saying that government by the people for the people is like open source taking away the monopoly of power that microsoft used to have.