http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/2 ... 34513.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/22/funniest-royal-baby-tweets_n_3634513.html)
Some amusing tweets to get you through this time of ennui and pointless news about spoiled rotten "royals" and their twerpy derpy over publicized lifestyle. Gag me, seriously.
Gee, I thought I was the only one who didn't give a flying fuck about the royal rug rat.
:wink:
There is England going through its economic woes, while hosting the most useless people on the planet, who own vast estates and untold millions in wealth, and do, as far as I can tell, basically nothing; aside from attending Wimbledon, or whatever.
How about depose the fuckers, assume their wealth and use it to invest in new policies that would greatly aid British economy? Just sayin.....
I couldn't give a monkey's chuff..... :butthead:
Quote from: "stromboli"There is England going through its economic woes, while hosting the most useless people on the planet, who own vast estates and untold millions in wealth, and do, as far as I can tell, basically nothing; aside from attending Wimbledon, or whatever.
Well, they do generate tourism pounds. The costs relative to the benefits is a bone of contention, though.
Supposedly the British royal family is extremely well marketed and brings in way more than their annual cost in tourism and other kinds of revenue.
The Dutch royal family on the other hand...
As a founding fathers type Liberal progressive democrat, I am especially anoid by the hype over the "royal" baby. When it is bairn it should be named "target" or "spoiled little worthless shit" because that is essentially what it is. It will never know work, suffering, reality, or anything worthwhile. It will be unduly catered on and spoiled beyond measure.
The thing is that "royalty" is a myth. The royals claimed to be chosen by a god and therefore deserve the riches that they obtain. Those riches were and are obtained on the backs of common people. People starve and suffer, go without, all for the sake of some fairytale fantasy.
Fuck the royals!!!!!! Fuck the media for making such a big deal over something that happens everyday. Oh big woop, another rich kid is born and yet millions go hungry to feed the greed of the bloody rich.
I say everyone that is born should be afforded mediaclcare to insure the livelyhood of each baby. I say every priviledged little shit should go to school with the rest of us ina SECULAR school. I say everyone should have to work 1000 community service hours (REAL WORK) before they graduate. Then they should have to serve in the military for four years (enlisted) or serve in a civil service job at the lowest rank possible, BEFORE they enter in a college.
Then and only then will these upper class jet setting snobs understand what the real world is all about, and just how privildged they really are.
My every breathing second is dedicated to NOTHING but guessing the worthless little anti-abort's name..
Prince stromboli? Prince Minimalist? Prince Yousuff? Prince Hydra? No! None seem right. I know! PRINCE PLU! Pronounced pluh.. You're good for princely names Plu.. :)
Quote from: "mykcob4"As a founding fathers type Liberal progressive democrat, I am especially anoid by the hype over the "royal" baby. When it is bairn it should be named "target" or "spoiled little worthless shit" because that is essentially what it is. It will never know work, suffering, reality, or anything worthwhile. It will be unduly catered on and spoiled beyond measure.
i can't believe i have to do this but...it's a baby for fucks sake. it hasn't even been born yet...is your life that shitty that you have to attack a baby? So it was born into privilige but come on, it's not the baby's fault.
if you don't care about the royal birth don't pay attention to it but i can't take you seriously when you call something that hasn't been born yet a "target" and "spoiled little worthless shit". I guess you are just projecting.
Quote from: "mykcob4"As a founding fathers type Liberal progressive democrat, I am especially anoid by the hype over the "royal" baby. When it is bairn it should be named "target" or "spoiled little worthless shit" because that is essentially what it is. It will never know work, suffering, reality, or anything worthwhile. It will be unduly catered on and spoiled beyond measure.
The thing is that "royalty" is a myth. The royals claimed to be chosen by a god and therefore deserve the riches that they obtain. Those riches were and are obtained on the backs of common people. People starve and suffer, go without, all for the sake of some fairytale fantasy.
Fuck the royals!!!!!! Fuck the media for making such a big deal over something that happens everyday. Oh big woop, another rich kid is born and yet millions go hungry to feed the greed of the bloody rich.
I say everyone that is born should be afforded mediaclcare to insure the livelyhood of each baby. I say every priviledged little shit should go to school with the rest of us ina SECULAR school. I say everyone should have to work 1000 community service hours (REAL WORK) before they graduate. Then they should have to serve in the military for four years (enlisted) or serve in a civil service job at the lowest rank possible, BEFORE they enter in a college.
Then and only then will these upper class jet setting snobs understand what the real world is all about, and just how privildged they really are.
the answer to a question no one asked.
I didn't even care before he fucked her.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 3072276456 (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/britons-urged-to-enjoy-last-few-hours-before-explosion-of-baby-bullshit-2013072276456)
QuoteBRITONS have been advised to enjoy life in the final hours before a million-megaton blast of bullshit is unleashed.
'Babypocalypse' experts have told Britons to leave work immediately and go with their loved ones to a beauty spot where they can spend these last fleeting moments of normality in quiet contemplation.
Professor Henry Brubaker of the Institute for Studies said: "We can't say for sure how your life will change after today, but change it will and not for the better.
"This birth is like the Cuban missile crisis, except it's not going to be averted.
"Once that child comes out of that vagina, nothing will be the same again.
"Leave work immediately. Visit or phone the people you care about.
"You might want to spend your 'final hours' in a calm, reflective state – or just go nuts with shagging, drugs and maybe some light destruction of property.
"If you are single, perhaps find an attractive stranger and ask them if they fancy doing it on the roof of a bus.
"The impending doom will make millions of us into wanton sexual libertines.
"But whatever you do today, make it count."
:rollin:
QuotePRINCE PLU! Pronounced pluh..
It's not pronounced pluh :(
(I don't think the Dutch 'u' is even pronouncable in English, though)
Well fuck you guys, I personally enjoy it.
:P
I'm old enough to remember the whole Princess Diane debacle. And Fergie. That ate up enough paper pulp to reforest the Sahara. And then the kids came. Lawd ha' mercy, the shit never ends.
Quote from: "Plu"QuotePRINCE PLU! Pronounced pluh..
It's not pronounced pluh :(
(I don't think the Dutch 'u' is even pronouncable in English, though)
Pleerlurhuheuh?
http://nl.forvo.com/word/paraplu/#nl (http://nl.forvo.com/word/paraplu/#nl)
(The word paraplu means umbrella and is entirely unrelated to my nickname but it's the only word I know that has the very clear dutch "plu" sound at the end. If anyone cares.)
I knew nothing about this baby until today. I didn't know the woman was pregnant.
I have Twitter - but I forget to check it. I've not been on FB forever and really don't miss it. Pinterest is just so I can look at pictures of places I'll likely never get to.......
heard about the royal babe about 10 mins ago and still don't care enough to be sick of his news yet.
Check me tomorrow - I may be tired of it IF I get to listen to the news between now and then.
:rollin:
No. I do not watch what passes for news, and have not read any more of this thread other than the title for fear of actually having to learn the gender and/or name of the latest winner of the birth lottery.
I find it funny (not aimed at people here) that people are complaining about this, but then were like...
"OMG! THE KARDASHIANS HAD A BABY OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG!!!"
Sorry, the monarchy is far more interesting than a rich media woman (and I will be fair; I think in terms of business the Kardashian's are geniuses.)
Quoteis your life that shitty that you have to attack a baby?
He's not attacking a baby. He's attacking a system which pretends that the little fuck is something special.
Quote from: "Minimalist"Quoteis your life that shitty that you have to attack a baby?
He's not attacking a baby. He's attacking a system which pretends that the little fuck is something special.
I'm sorry, but when your grandmother is the queen... yeah, that "little fuck" is more important than you or I.
Quote from: "Minimalist"Quoteis your life that shitty that you have to attack a baby?
He's not attacking a baby. He's attacking a system which pretends that the little fuck is something special.
no he's attacking the baby. when he calls it a "target" and "spoiled little worthless shit" that's attacking the baby. blame the system if you want...again, it's not the baby's fault who the parents are. it's just a newborn. it sleeps and poops oddly, and eats...that's it.
and it still stands that if you need to refer to it as a little fuck i'd take a long look at why a newborn makes you that mad.
Quote from: "stromboli"Quote from: "Plu"QuotePRINCE PLU! Pronounced pluh..
It's not pronounced pluh :(
(I don't think the Dutch 'u' is even pronouncable in English, though)
Pleerlurhuheuh?
Plu is not a Dutch word, and a U is pronounced OO. lul Solitary
That's how I always assumed it was pronounced...
Quote from: "surly74"Quote from: "mykcob4"As a founding fathers type Liberal progressive democrat, I am especially anoid by the hype over the "royal" baby. When it is bairn it should be named "target" or "spoiled little worthless shit" because that is essentially what it is. It will never know work, suffering, reality, or anything worthwhile. It will be unduly catered on and spoiled beyond measure.
i can't believe i have to do this but...it's a baby for fucks sake. it hasn't even been born yet...is your life that shitty that you have to attack a baby? So it was born into privilige but come on, it's not the baby's fault.
if you don't care about the royal birth don't pay attention to it but i can't take you seriously when you call something that hasn't been born yet a "target" and "spoiled little worthless shit". I guess you are just projecting.
Not projecting. I doesn't take a brainiac to know that that baby represents much more than flesh and blood. I am NOT attacking a baby. I am attacking the society that punishes whole peoples and benefits the very rich, the undeserving by causing the misery of so many. And don't feel sorry for that baby. Unless it learns to read and actually reads a tabloid or two, it will never know even disagreement. It will probably enter Sandhurst and graduate with a rank far beyond what it deserves. The crap that a royal actually was ever put into harms way is laughable. Just as laughable as having a real military job. Funny how the failure rate is about 50% and yet no royal has ever failed....not likely. Next they want us to believe that the royals are doing their part in any war. Gee thanks for the fly over. It's so comforting to know that your protected ass actually flew close enough to get a look at a battlefield all the time being several kilometers out of range. Oh and thanks for showing up at the hospital and telling me that you appreciate MY service. I'll take that to the bank and cash it in to replace the leg I lost. Kinda like all the numbnuts that put a ribbon sticker on their car that says just how much they support the troops, and yet they won't make a single sacrifice to support those same troops. The royal family is just the figurehead of crimes on humanity. Look at the difference of income by people who really work and the extreme rich. How people in Detroit have to have their retirement cut to save the city all the while the rich just get richer. And no the royals aren't directly responsible for Detroit but they are part of a much larger problem whereby the extreme rich who don't earn or deserve the riches they enjoy, enjoy those riches off of the backs of the working poor. So I'm not attacking a "baby", I'm voicing the extreme dispartity that exist and the symbology that is the royal family represents that disparity.
Sorry, but the Royal Family more than pays for itself in tourism and it's fair share from its own bank into charities and (I believe) taxes.
Nothing wrong with hating the system, but hating them simply because they are rich, even though they contribute astronomically more than they cost, is just being silly.
As an American...
(//http://i.imgur.com/maVFZDF.jpg)
And I won't even mention the French take on royalty...
What Royal Baby?
Quote from: "Hydra009"As an American...
[ Image (//http://i.imgur.com/maVFZDF.jpg) ]
And I won't even mention the French take on royalty...
It's funny because the French go just as, if not more, crazy for the British royal family as the Brits do. The French love the BRF.
Quote from: "Shiranu"Quote from: "Hydra009"As an American...
[ Image (//http://i.imgur.com/maVFZDF.jpg) ]
And I won't even mention the French take on royalty...
It's funny because the French go just as, if not more, crazy for the British royal family as the Brits do. The French love the BRF.
Yep. Which is sort of weird considering their *cough* history with royalty. France is like this super rebellious kid who used to get into knife fights and commit arson, then grew up and became a yuppie. :P
Quote from: "Shiranu"I find it funny (not aimed at people here) that people are complaining about this, but then were like...
"OMG! THE KARDASHIANS HAD A BABY OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG!!!"
Sorry, the monarchy is far more interesting than a rich media woman (and I will be fair; I think in terms of business the Kardashian's are geniuses.)
People who react to a kardashian baby like that should have their own removed from their care :-k
Quote from: "mykcob4"Not projecting. I doesn't take a brainiac to know that that baby represents much more than flesh and blood. I am NOT attacking a baby. I am attacking the society that punishes whole peoples and benefits the very rich, the undeserving by causing the misery of so many. And don't feel sorry for that baby. Unless it learns to read and actually reads a tabloid or two, it will never know even disagreement. It will probably enter Sandhurst and graduate with a rank far beyond what it deserves. The crap that a royal actually was ever put into harms way is laughable. Just as laughable as having a real military job. Funny how the failure rate is about 50% and yet no royal has ever failed....not likely. Next they want us to believe that the royals are doing their part in any war. Gee thanks for the fly over. It's so comforting to know that your protected ass actually flew close enough to get a look at a battlefield all the time being several kilometers out of range. Oh and thanks for showing up at the hospital and telling me that you appreciate MY service. I'll take that to the bank and cash it in to replace the leg I lost. Kinda like all the numbnuts that put a ribbon sticker on their car that says just how much they support the troops, and yet they won't make a single sacrifice to support those same troops. The royal family is just the figurehead of crimes on humanity. Look at the difference of income by people who really work and the extreme rich. How people in Detroit have to have their retirement cut to save the city all the while the rich just get richer. And no the royals aren't directly responsible for Detroit but they are part of a much larger problem whereby the extreme rich who don't earn or deserve the riches they enjoy, enjoy those riches off of the backs of the working poor. So I'm not attacking a "baby", I'm voicing the extreme dispartity that exist and the symbology that is the royal family represents that disparity.
calling a baby names = attacking the baby...but fine whatever.
not necessarily with the royals but why is the solution always to tear someone down instead of building someone up? this sounds like the 99%'er drivel...oh the world is unfair and I don't like it. people have something I don't.
QuoteSick of the Royal Baby Already?
I was sick of him before he got that bint pregnant.
I actually now consider myself lucky that I missed the whole pregnancy. And that I am disconnected from the regular media enough that I've only seen (outside of this forum) two people post something about it, and both were funny images and not news articles.
Inside every new born baby is a small spark that if properly nurtured, can bloom into an adult jerk. :-D
Absolutely fucking sick of it. They are simply welfare queens. I don't know who is worse, that family, or the idiots who pay taxes to support them.
RICH PEOPLE FUCK, IN OTHER NEWS SO THE FUCK WHAT!
And the west wonders why oil companies pay no taxes?
I care about babies to the extent once they are born, no matter what class, are happy and end up well adjusted as adults. But why the fuck do humans make such a big deal about something that happens millions of times a day?
My boss has a picture of his daughter at the cash register. Yea, you love your kid. But from my point of view you are asking me to be impressed with the fact that you stuck your penis in a vagina. It isn't about the kid, it is about human narcissism.
Love your kid, take care of your kid, but please don't ask me to be impressed with your ability to fuck.
QuoteMy boss has a picture of his daughter at the cash register.
What makes you think your boss cares whether or not you are impressed with the kid, though? :)
I have a whole bunch of pictures of my daughter rotating around as my work-desktop background. I don't give a flying fuck about whether or not my co-workers are impressed with my ability to have sex with my girlfriend; those pictures are there for
me. I wouldn't be surprised if your boss is the same.
Quote from: "Plu"QuoteMy boss has a picture of his daughter at the cash register.
What makes you think your boss cares whether or not you are impressed with the kid, though? :)
I have a whole bunch of pictures of my daughter rotating around as my work-desktop background. I don't give a flying fuck about whether or not my co-workers are impressed with my ability to have sex with my girlfriend; those pictures are there for me. I wouldn't be surprised if your boss is the same.
Bullshit, now in your case, I get that but that isn't for public display in your case, that is for you. I DO GET THAT, just like you'd have pictures of your family and kids in your home.
But don't tell me parents don't put pictures on display, like my boss or try to show others pictures. They do. My only point is fine, have pictures, but don't expect me to be impressed with it. I am not. Human evolution past present and future does not give one fuck about you or me or the offspring we might produce.
I have pictures on my fridge of my sisters and my mother, but those are for me. What I don't do is parade them around in public. I will show them if asked but I don't make a show out of my family.
I don't make a show out of people either, but simply putting a picture down isn't automatically making a show, or for others. Even in a public display. It might be, it might not be. He might just have put them there because he likes seeing them there when he comes by.
(Now if they're in some kind of show case in a place where your boss never shows his own face; yeah ok he's probably just showing off, which is stupid and unimpressive.)
Oh knock it off. Kate's no longer pregnant and the ONLY thing anyone should care about is does she have a bunch of stretch marks.. Other than that it's mindless drivel. :)
Quote from: "surly74"Quote from: "mykcob4"Not projecting. I doesn't take a brainiac to know that that baby represents much more than flesh and blood. I am NOT attacking a baby. I am attacking the society that punishes whole peoples and benefits the very rich, the undeserving by causing the misery of so many. And don't feel sorry for that baby. Unless it learns to read and actually reads a tabloid or two, it will never know even disagreement. It will probably enter Sandhurst and graduate with a rank far beyond what it deserves. The crap that a royal actually was ever put into harms way is laughable. Just as laughable as having a real military job. Funny how the failure rate is about 50% and yet no royal has ever failed....not likely. Next they want us to believe that the royals are doing their part in any war. Gee thanks for the fly over. It's so comforting to know that your protected ass actually flew close enough to get a look at a battlefield all the time being several kilometers out of range. Oh and thanks for showing up at the hospital and telling me that you appreciate MY service. I'll take that to the bank and cash it in to replace the leg I lost. Kinda like all the numbnuts that put a ribbon sticker on their car that says just how much they support the troops, and yet they won't make a single sacrifice to support those same troops. The royal family is just the figurehead of crimes on humanity. Look at the difference of income by people who really work and the extreme rich. How people in Detroit have to have their retirement cut to save the city all the while the rich just get richer. And no the royals aren't directly responsible for Detroit but they are part of a much larger problem whereby the extreme rich who don't earn or deserve the riches they enjoy, enjoy those riches off of the backs of the working poor. So I'm not attacking a "baby", I'm voicing the extreme dispartity that exist and the symbology that is the royal family represents that disparity.
calling a baby names = attacking the baby...but fine whatever.
not necessarily with the royals but why is the solution always to tear someone down instead of building someone up? this sounds like the 99%'er drivel...oh the world is unfair and I don't like it. people have something I don't.
Yeah right as if I really called any baby names.
There are a few facts that people will not face in this world just because something is cute or little.
Fact I: "I'm a good mother" Every mom says this as if it's true. The fact is there are few good mothers and not many adequate ones. No mom is good all of the time and nowadays most aren't good any of the time.
Fact II: "You don't know because you don't have any kids." I have heard that lie all my adult life yet whenever these morons want someone to look after their brats that come a callin'. Raising kids is simple. PAY ATTENTION!!!!!! Ignoring kids is the biggest mistake that parents make. They only seem to pay attention to their kid if the kid interupts what the parent is doing.
I hate when a kid is being a brat and the parent says "Isn't that cute" as if laughing about it makes everything alright. Kids inevitably learn that being mischief is funny and therefore can get away with it.
I really hate it when a parent hits a kid out of anger. That just teaches them that if you are mad it's alright to hit someone.
Fact III: Babies aren't innocent just because they are babies.
We socially penalize kids in slumbs and ghettos just for being born. Are they innocent? Sure they are, but don't tell society that. Now comes the filthy undeserving rich baby. He is just as innocent as the slumb babies but you better not say a damned word about the rich baby, because he's "just an innocent baby."
That rich baby will cause more misery and suffering just for being born than any slumb baby ever born. It's like every royal and filthy rich baby born is an indirect cause of mass murder, hard labor, and misery.
You ask me to just ignore the royal baby, but I cannot ignore the consequences of that baby being born any more than I can ignore a baby being born into abject poverty.
So if it offends you for me being harsh to a newborn, then your priorities are scewed. Maybe the new baby will renounce his station and birthright and actually work and bring comfort...REAL comfort to those who suffer. FDR was just such an individual. It's possible but highly unlikely. NO, what will probably happen is that this baby will grow up sheltered and never know that people will work for low wages and suffer to keep him in the splender that he knows and doesn't deserve.
Royalty is a symbol of oppression and represents the worst that society has ever offered humanity.
A woman I'll never meet had a baby I'll never meet. That's such a rare thing - doesn't happen more than a few times a minute.
I don't wish them any ill, but I don't wish them anything I don't wish any woman who gave birth recently. Or care any more about this birth.
I don't give a fuck. but news like this and Justin Beiber peeing in a mop bucket while cursing Clinton still manage to get through to me because that shit is everywhere on every news site, facebook and forum.
no matter where you go its there and I wind up learning about it.
I wish real news were like that.
how many people know about this stupid baby or some other pointless bullshit vs important things like how hospitals rig pricing, or how the banks have laundered money to Al Quida?
fuck the royal family.
Quote from: "Brian37"Absolutely fucking sick of it. They are simply welfare queens. I don't know who is worse, that family, or the idiots who pay taxes to support them.
RICH PEOPLE FUCK, IN OTHER NEWS SO THE FUCK WHAT!
And the west wonders why oil companies pay no taxes?
I guess we have different interpretations of "Welfare queens"... someone who pays taxes, millions in charities and astronomical sums in tourism revenue are hardly "welfare queens".
I guess zoos and museums are also welfare queens... call me crazy, but I'm a liberal/progressive who doesn't just hate people because they are rich.
Shiranu, I don't hate people for being rich.
but I do hate people that didn't earn it.
the queen is rich because she was born into the royal family.
She didn't do anything to earn it like Steve Jobs or Bill Gates did.
And that's a reason to hate people who donate millions to charity, contribute astronomical numbers in tourism, pay taxes, continue a cultural tradition that goes back over 1500 years and who from all accounts seem to be very nice people with their head's screwed on straight?
And why does Steve Jobs deserve respect? Apple is notorious for the bad conditions at their factories in China. He often thought that charity was a waste of time. He had some questionable beliefs on alternative medicine.
Sorry, but the BRF contributes just as much, if not more, to British society than Steve Jobs ever did, and they didn't have to do it with the help of sweat shops in China (Nowadays, mind you... not saying the Royalty didn't do bad shit back when they were in power).
I like to judge people by how much they accomplish for others vs how much they are given to work with. It lets me appreciate people like the british crown (born rich but trying to do good), bill gates (born poor, selfmade billionaire, and also trying to do good) as well as dislike various people, both born rich, become rich, or still poor who have the means and don't use it properly.
Far better to judge people by their actions compared to their means than just their means alone.
I am glad the queen gives some of her money (that she obtains from her british subjects) to good causes.
But I am firmly opposed to monarchies.
Even if her power is mostly symbolic.
what is it a symbol of?
dictatorships?
that some people are better than others because of their bloodlines?
fuck the royalty.
Quotewhat is it a symbol of?
The will and strength of the British people, an institution that goes back 1500 years and united various tribes into one greater whole, rulers that protected the Isles from foreign invaders, rulers that expanded the borders of Britain to the point that the sun never set on the British Empire.
Quotethat some people are better than others because of their bloodlines?
And we don't have that in non-monarchies?
Ever heard of the Clintons? The Kardashians? The Bushes? The Trumps, the Hiltons, the Kennedys'?
That's a human thing, that has nothing to do with monarchy.
Okay, some mathematics time...
QuoteThe Sovereign Grant funding system, which covers the royal costs, has been set at £36.1 million for the 2013-14 financial year.
So, the royal costs is roughly 36.1 million pounds this coming year.
QuoteThe Crown Estate is one of the largest property owners in the United Kingdom, with holdings of £7.3 billion in 2011.[4] It is held in trust, and cannot be sold or owned by the Sovereign in a private capacity.[5] In modern times, the profits surrendered from the Crown Estate have exceeded the Civil List and Grants-in-Aid.[2] For example, the Crown Estate produced £200 million for the Treasury in the financial year 2007–8, whereas reported parliamentary funding for the monarch was £40 million during the same period.[6]
That is a 5 to 1 ratio in 2007-8 on money produced vs money expended.
Now, add on top of that tourist revenue that is harder to track. I'm sorry, you can hate them all you want... but if you call them welfare queens, leeches, that they are "exploiting the tax payer"... you are simply dead wrong.
Quote from: "Shiranu"Quotewhat is it a symbol of?
The will and strength of the British people, an institution that goes back 1500 years and united various tribes into one greater whole, rulers that protected the Isles from foreign invaders, rulers that expanded the borders of Britain to the point that the sun never set on the British Empire.
:lol: yes lets celebrate imperialism.
The British can celebrate all that stuff without elevating one family above everybody else.
We do. We rally around our flag. We pledge allegiance to our country. We don't elevate one family by birthright above the rest of us.
QuoteQuotethat some people are better than others because of their bloodlines?
And we don't have that in non-monarchies?
Ever heard of the Clintons? The Kardashians? The Bushes? The Trumps, the Hiltons?
That's a human thing, that has nothing to do with monarchy.
1. I think celebrity worship is just as asinine.
2. the state doesn't make you pay tributes or taxes or pledge loyalty to any of these people.
3. at least most of our Celebrities get famous mostly because of shit they do, not just because of some bloodline. (excluding examples like Megan Mccain or Caroline Kennedy and such anyway) though its still asinine to put these people on a pedestal.
Quote from: "Shiranu"Okay, some mathematics time...
QuoteThe Sovereign Grant funding system, which covers the royal costs, has been set at £36.1 million for the 2013-14 financial year.
So, the royal costs is roughly 36.1 million pounds this coming year.
QuoteThe Crown Estate is one of the largest property owners in the United Kingdom, with holdings of £7.3 billion in 2011.[4] It is held in trust, and cannot be sold or owned by the Sovereign in a private capacity.[5] In modern times, the profits surrendered from the Crown Estate have exceeded the Civil List and Grants-in-Aid.[2] For example, the Crown Estate produced £200 million for the Treasury in the financial year 2007–8, whereas reported parliamentary funding for the monarch was £40 million during the same period.[6]
That is a 5 to 1 ratio in 2007-8 on money produced vs money expended.
Now, add on top of that tourist revenue that is harder to track. I'm sorry, you can hate them all you want... but if you call them welfare queens, leeches, that they are "exploiting the tax payer"... you are simply dead wrong.
good if its so profitable, thanks to tourism, than end any government support of it.
Disneyland doesn't require government subsidies to get by.
Quote from: "Shiranu"Quote from: "Brian37"Absolutely fucking sick of it. They are simply welfare queens. I don't know who is worse, that family, or the idiots who pay taxes to support them.
RICH PEOPLE FUCK, IN OTHER NEWS SO THE FUCK WHAT!
And the west wonders why oil companies pay no taxes?
I guess we have different interpretations of "Welfare queens"... someone who pays taxes, millions in charities and astronomical sums in tourism revenue are hardly "welfare queens".
I guess zoos and museums are also welfare queens... call me crazy, but I'm a liberal/progressive who doesn't just hate people because they are rich.
Stop, where did I ever say I hate all wealthy people? I hate worship of wealth blindly or worship of anything, celebrity, political party, race or religion or nationaliy, blindly ANYTHING.
Right, the Royal family are simply high paid zoo exhibits, but they are also welfare queens. The empire their ancestors created was not born out of democracy. It was started by the "divine right of kings BY FORCE". Now, if they are mere figure heads, then they are NOT a necessity to the survival of Britain. The palaces could still be Museums without people living in them and tours could still be given. The money saved by not supporting their salaries could be used for creating jobs and cheaper higher education. They have economic problems too, and much of that could be solved if the money sucked out of the tax payers to support them stayed in the tax payers hands.
They are merely a tourist draw, so what? I don't want the Mormon Tabernackle(sp) torn down but I certainly don't think as it currently stands with people ignoring it's history and the evil that built it, helps humans understand where they came from.
A Monarchy is still a dictatorship, even if only in name. I don't like the worship of a horrible history, even if the current lot in power are not doing it now. It sill allows humans to ignore our past.
So when I say "RICH PEOPLE FUCK" I can also say "MEXICANS FUCK" "ATHEISTS FUCK" "POOR PEOPLE FUCK" "FRENCH PEOPLE FUCK" "MUSLIMS FUCK" "JAPANESE FUCK"
Get it? None of us are special, that is the point of it all. Evolution doesn't give one fuck who you are, what family you were born into, what nation you came from, or how much money you have or don't have. In the end we all die. And in 1 million years no one is going to be around to give one fuck about this family or that baby. And in a few billion years from now, all life on this planet will go extinct, and even the sun will die. The universe will go on without any record of us.
It is the WORSHIP I hate. This worship of one family takes away resources from people in that nation that are much more in need of it than that family.
QuoteDisneyland doesn't require government subsidies to get by.
Neither does the Royal Family apparently. And Disneyland DOES get subsidiaries, as do zoos and amusement parks. That's one benefit of generating revenue for the state... you tend to get something back from the state.
Quoteyes lets celebrate imperialism.
When Africans celebrate their culture... "Ah, good for them! They aren't bowing down to western influence!"
When Japanese celebrate their culture..."Ah, good for them! They aren't bowing down to western influence!"
When the British celebrate their culture... "OMG IMPERIALISTIC SCUM, HOW DARE THEY! THAT IS A INSTITUTION OF OPPRESSION HOW DARE THEY DO THAT!"
QuoteWe do. We rally around our flag.
A flag that stands for what, exactly?
The 50 stars... representing 50 states... most of which we slaughtered the locals or fucked them over for.
Yay, America... we are sooooo much better...
Quote from: "hillbillyatheist"We don't elevate one family by birthright above the rest of us.
With the possible exception of the Kennedys, anyway.
Quote from: "Plu"I like to judge people by how much they accomplish for others vs how much they are given to work with. It lets me appreciate people like the british crown (born rich but trying to do good), bill gates (born poor, selfmade billionaire, and also trying to do good) as well as dislike various people, both born rich, become rich, or still poor who have the means and don't use it properly.
Far better to judge people by their actions compared to their means than just their means alone.
Yes that family is doing so good that the College tuition rates are STILL SKYROCKETING over there. A few days of economic boom because two people fucked, does not insure long term economic stability for the nation. That family may personally want to help, but as an institution it is a distraction that takes away resources.
That's like saying casinos bring in taxes, sure they do, but look how many broke people they create in the process.
Quote from: "Shiranu"QuoteDisneyland doesn't require government subsidies to get by.
Neither does the Royal Family apparently. And Disneyland DOES get subsidiaries, as do zoos and amusement parks. That's one benefit of generating revenue for the state... you tend to get something back from the state.
Disneyland doesn't need subsidies. anymore than the oil companies do. just because corporations fucked up our system doesn't make it okay. They could get by without any help.
QuoteQuoteyes lets celebrate imperialism.
When Africans celebrate their culture... "Ah, good for them! They aren't bowing down to western influence!"
When Japanese celebrate their culture..."Ah, good for them! They aren't bowing down to western influence!"
When the British celebrate their culture... "OMG IMPERIALISTIC SCUM, HOW DARE THEY! THAT IS A INSTITUTION OF OPPRESSION HOW DARE THEY DO THAT!"
who said British people couldn't celebrate their culture? if they ended the monarchy and became a full fledged republic, they could still rally around their flag.
QuoteQuoteWe do. We rally around our flag.
A flag that stands for what, exactly?
The 50 stars... representing 50 states... most of which we slaughtered the locals or fucked them over for.
Yay, America... we are sooooo much better...
So you're saying americans can't be proud but brittish can? why the double standard?
Our flag represents america. The british flag represents brittain. The queen is just the descendant of a family that conquered the islands by force and who would still be a dictatorship where it not for for the British subjects forcing the royalty to sign the Magna Carta.
Oh stop, I am not judging someone merely because they have wealth or are born into it. But the worship of it is sickening to me.
People should be judged by their actions. But people should also be able to reason about the means of the nation vs a personal luxury and Britain has never been practical about the impracticality of having a Royal Family. Wanting them and needing them are two different things.
QuoteRight, the Royal family are simply high paid zoo exhibits, but they are also welfare queens. The empire their ancestors created was not born out of democracy. It was started by the "divine right of kings BY FORCE". Now, if they are mere figure heads, then they are NOT a necessity to the survival of Britain. The palaces could still be Museums without people living in them and tours could still be given. The money saved by not supporting their salaries could be used for creating jobs and cheaper higher education. They have economic problems too, and much of that could be solved if the money sucked out of the tax payers to support them stayed in the tax payers hands.
The thing is people go to see a LIVING monarchy.
And so what if they aren't "necessary" to the survival of Britian? I guarantee you Britain ain't goin' anywhere anytime soon. So if they want to continue a cultural institution that provides more money back than it takes, have at it.
QuoteA Monarchy is still a dictatorship, even if only in name. I don't like the worship of a horrible history, even if the current lot in power are not doing it now. It sill allows humans to ignore our past.
But that is exactly what you are asking people to do... ignore the past. Get rid of your culture, become a homogeneous blob of people that have no individual histories or customs. Like it or not, the monarchy IS British history... without it, there would be no Britain.
QuoteGet it? None of us are special, that is the point of it all. Evolution doesn't give one fuck who you are, what family you were born into, what nation you came from, or how much money you have or don't have. In the end we all die. And in 1 million years no one is going to be around to give one fuck about this family or that baby. And in a few billion years from now, all life on this planet will go extinct, and even the sun will die. The universe will go on without any record of us.
If evolution doesn't give a fuck, then why should you? And why should you therefor condemn people for not bowing to what evolution wants when you say it wants nothing?
QuoteSo you're saying americans can't be proud but brittish can? why the double standard?
Our flag represents america. The british flag represents brittain. The queen is just the descendant of a family that conquered the islands by force and who would still be a dictatorship where it not for for the British subjects forcing the royalty to sign the Magna Carta.
*facepalm*
If you are going to condemn the Brits for being proud of their history because its exhibited oppression, then you cant at the same time say American's are any better with their motifs and symbols. The flag is just as dirty of symbol, if not more, as the monarchy, yet the post I quoted you were holding it up like it was somehow any better than them.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "hillbillyatheist"We don't elevate one family by birthright above the rest of us.
With the possible exception of the Kennedys, anyway.
Yeah, but fat lot of good that did for ol' John and Robert. :P
As per this issue about the royal baby bringing so much attention and such, I can kind of understand it. I mean, the royal family kind of represents a time when the English enjoyed the most powerful empire in the world. Sure it was horrible for the people under their control, and that shouldn't be overlooked, but at that time things were going wonderfully for the British. As per Americans and others who are going absolutely gaga over this, I'm guessing it has something to do with us being strong allies with the UK, and a general liking of British culture in general over here...not exactly sure.
QuoteOh stop, I am not judging someone merely because they have wealth or are born into it.
QuoteAbsolutely fucking sick of it. They are simply welfare queens. I don't know who is worse, that family, or the idiots who pay taxes to support them.
Quote from: "Shiranu"QuoteSo you're saying americans can't be proud but brittish can? why the double standard?
Our flag represents america. The british flag represents brittain. The queen is just the descendant of a family that conquered the islands by force and who would still be a dictatorship where it not for for the British subjects forcing the royalty to sign the Magna Carta.
*facepalm*
If you are going to condemn the Brits for being proud of their history because its exhibited oppression, then you cant at the same time say American's are any better with their motifs and symbols. The flag is just as dirty of symbol, if not more, as the monarchy, yet the post I quoted you were holding it up like it was somehow any better than them.
LOL you missed my point. neither americans nor british people should hate their countries because of the past.
the british could still celebrate their culture and shit same as we do. we don't have a king. do you think we should?
if we can rally around a flag and eat turkey, why can't they rally around their flag and eat blood pie, all without elevating one family above the rest?
Quotethe british could still celebrate their culture and shit same as we do. we don't have a king. do you think we should?
Uh, no... of course I don't.
We also didn't have a monarchy for 1500 years (that is over 7 times as old as we have even existed as a nation) who unified the various countries and tribes of the British Isles, so it wouldn't make any sense.
Quotef we can rally around a flag and eat turkey, why can't they rally around their flag and eat blood pie, all without elevating one family above the rest?
So our culture is better, and they should therefor do things like us.
Sorry, I don't buy that ethnocentrism bull.
Quote from: "Shiranu"Quotethe british could still celebrate their culture and shit same as we do. we don't have a king. do you think we should?
Uh, no... of course I don't.
We also didn't have a monarchy for 1500 years (that is over 7 times as old as we have even existed as a nation) who unified the various countries and tribes of the British Isles, so it wouldn't make any sense.
lets run with this. How do you feel about the south and confederate flags and such?
look at the Irish. they finally gained independence from the crown and they still managed to celebrate their rich culture and rally around their flag.
you don't think the british couldn't do likewise? 1500 years of monarchy doesn't matter to me. slavery is much older why don't we still celebrate that institution? what if the south kept symbolic slavery?
QuoteQuotef we can rally around a flag and eat turkey, why can't they rally around their flag and eat blood pie, all without elevating one family above the rest?
So our culture is better, and they should therefore do things like us.
Sorry, I don't buy that ethnocentrism bull.
yes republics are better than monarchies. they should do that like us.
there's alot more to their culture than some old hag in a castle.
Quotelets run with this. How do you feel about the south and confederate flags and such?
Depends on why you fly it. If you are proud of being Southern, go for it. If you are proud of your South for "putting the blacks in their place", well then you are a sad person.
Quoteyou don't think the british couldn't do likewise? 1500 years of monarchy doesn't matter to me. slavery is much older why don't we still celebrate that institution? what if the south kept symbolic slavery?
I didn't realize slavery unified 4 nations, promoted the arts in England, protected the nation in time of war....
Quoteyes republics are better than monarchies. they should do that like us.
You... did you really just imply that the UK is still a monarchy?
(//http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hyutTEBydAg/UVN-pSmJ3aI/AAAAAAAAAE8/ojRPQ0Npb7s/s200/NotSureIfSerious.jpg)
Quotethere's alot more to their culture than some old hag in a castle.
I see you apparently don't know a thing about the monarchy or how it ACTUALLY works anymore then, or apparently its influence in basically every aspect of British culture, from art to writing to its symbolism to the English people in times of crisis.
Quote from: "Shiranu"The thing is people go to see a LIVING monarchy.
Only by very broad definition of living.
Quote from: "hillbillyatheist"yes republics are better than monarchies. they should do that like us.
And they do, to a large extent. It's a parliamentary system with a vestigial monarchy.
Quote from: "Shiranu"Quotelets run with this. How do you feel about the south and confederate flags and such?
Depends on why you fly it. If you are proud of being Southern, go for it. If you are proud of your South for "putting the blacks in their place", well then you are a sad person.
Quoteyou don't think the british couldn't do likewise? 1500 years of monarchy doesn't matter to me. slavery is much older why don't we still celebrate that institution? what if the south kept symbolic slavery?
I didn't realize slavery unified 4 nations.
who said slavery unified four nations?
that said who said those nations WANTED unified? by that logic india should be celebrating too. after all the royalty united lots of countries! LOL including them.
QuoteQuoteyes republics are better than monarchies. they should do that like us.
You... did you really just imply that the UK is still a monarchy?
it is. to be exact its a constitutional monarchy.
QuoteQuotethere's alot more to their culture than some old hag in a castle.
I see you apparently don't know a thing about the monarchy or how it ACTUALLY works anymore then, or apparently its influence in basically every aspect of British culture, from art to writing to its symbolism to the English people in times of crisis.
I'm aware of things such as the fact that the royalty is mostly a ceremonial thing now. I don't care. basically in england if my last name is Windsor I'm above everybody else. I think thats sick. fuck the royalty. I hate everything they stand for. it seems we're at an impasse. I suppose we should just shake hands and agree to disagree.
Quoteit is. to be exact its a constitutional monarchy.
It's a monarchy in which the monarchy has zero power... that is not a monarchy.
QuoteI don't care. basically in england if my last name is Windsor I'm above everybody else. I think thats sick. fuck the royalty. I hate everything they stand for. it seems we're at an impasse. I suppose we should just shake hands and agree to disagree.
I guess. Clearly the English don't have a problem with it since they support it, and since they are the ones who have to deal with it, not us... I don't see why it's our place to judge them for it.
And that is simple human nature, that will happen even if we lived in a purely communist nation in which everyone was on paper equal. For as much as Brian likes to talk about evolution, he should be all over this... this is a product of human evolution. People who's family have done great things will be judged on a different level. People who's families have done terrible things will be judged on a different level. You can hate that all you want, but that is the way our brain's are wired.
(//http://i.imgur.com/q4rI7cr.gif)
(//http://i.imgur.com/eKCyVRk.gif)
(//http://i.imgur.com/MVSObhF.gif)
WAT.
Oh yeah, having a son was her clever plan from the get go. Because that's really something you have a lot of control over. :rolleyes:
For her next trick, she might have to eat something and use the loo. *feigned surprise*
Royalty---Off with their heads! :-& :Hangman: Solitary
Quote from: "Hydra009"[ Image (//http://i.imgur.com/q4rI7cr.gif) ]
[ Image (//http://i.imgur.com/eKCyVRk.gif) ]
[ Image (//http://i.imgur.com/MVSObhF.gif) ]
WAT.
Oh yeah, having a son was her clever plan from the get go. Because that's really something you have a lot of control over. :rolleyes:
For her next trick, she might have to eat something and use the loo. *feigned surprise*
I saw that... to be fair to her, I'm sure some stupid reporter in Britain or France said something just as stupid... but come on, you're making us look bad!
Oh the monarchy has no power....well lets just see about that. Every time the British have an election it must be sanctioned by the ruling monarch. Hmmm....seems like that is a great deal of power to me.
The British don't have a constitution and never have had. Tha Magna Carta is an agreement between the Queen/King and the Lords(landed gentry/ Royals), it doesn't give ANY rights so ever to the commons.
So the United Kingdom is neither a constitutional moarchy or a true representative democracy. It is a nation ruled by the landed gentry. Yes they have a House of Commons that has the ability to pass and enact law but the House of lords has full veto power. The House of Lords and the House of Commons function at the leisure of the crown of the realm. So in truth according British law the monarchy actually retains all power. They just don't actively enact such power.
When you are sent to prison in Britain you are a "guest of the crown."
Every law is enacted at the leisure of the crown. So call it what you will but the monarchy is real in Britian. The people of Britain are subjects of the crown.
http://www.rogerdarlington.me.uk/Britis ... Government (http://www.rogerdarlington.me.uk/Britishpoliticalsystem.html#Government)
Well shit, I stand corrected.
America needs a king or queen asap, since England seems to have their shit more together than us (for the most part... *cough* porn ban *cough*).
Quote from: "Shiranu"Okay, some mathematics time...
QuoteThe Sovereign Grant funding system, which covers the royal costs, has been set at £36.1 million for the 2013-14 financial year.
So, the royal costs is roughly 36.1 million pounds this coming year.
QuoteThe Crown Estate is one of the largest property owners in the United Kingdom, with holdings of £7.3 billion in 2011.[4] It is held in trust, and cannot be sold or owned by the Sovereign in a private capacity.[5] In modern times, the profits surrendered from the Crown Estate have exceeded the Civil List and Grants-in-Aid.[2] For example, the Crown Estate produced £200 million for the Treasury in the financial year 2007–8, whereas reported parliamentary funding for the monarch was £40 million during the same period.[6]
That is a 5 to 1 ratio in 2007-8 on money produced vs money expended.
Nope. The property (basically owned by the British government) brought in 5 times what the royal family cost. If the royal family were to suddenly be eliminated, the property would still bring in the same moneys. What the royal family brings in is tourism money, and not all the tourism money either, and I don't see that listed here.
However, is this really a true measure of whether royalty should survive into the 21st century? How much did slavery bring into the southern states during the time it was legal? Would any number be justification for slavery? I think the discussion is whether royalty is justified based on the concept of royalty itself, not based on money.
Sure it had a valid purpose at one time - it helped the leader of what was basically a bunch of illiterate peasants to mold a large amount of land into a nation. But the 18th century kind of proved that we no longer needed a monarch to be able to do that.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Oh the monarchy has no power....well lets just see about that. Every time the British have an election it must be sanctioned by the ruling monarch. Hmmm....seems like that is a great deal of power to me.
Technically, they could refuse, but it'll never happen. (Fun fact, the last time the royal assent was not given was in 1707) When you have less discretionary power than the Pope, you're pretty much a figurehead. Which is basically what the UK royalty are. As the saying goes, "the Queen reigns, but she does not rule".
Compare the UK's power structure to say Saudi Arabia, and it's it's pretty obvious whose monarchy wields a great deal of power and whose doesn't.
QuoteThe British don't have a constitution and never have had.
That's partially true. Unlike the United States, the UK does not have a single constitutional document. But there's a wealth of documents that form an uncodified legal framework.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitut ... ed_Kingdom (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom)
I'm sorry, I just seem to miss how a royal family is this huge crime against humanity. Britain is doing far better than us, they make money off of them, don't seem to have any real problem with them and honestly I couldn't give a rat's ass about what crimes the predecessor's committed... I'm not going to judge this family based on what their ancestors did.
It's not like the Crown is actively throwing people in jail, colonizing Africa or India, or bringing their country down in any way, form or manner... and that's ignoring all the POSITIVES the royal family provided throughout history or today. Just because you may disagree with their job, so long as they are not hurting anyone (and infact contributing to society) is not a good enough justification imo to throw away 1500 years of culture. And I'm sorry, but if you think the Crown is the legislative powerhouse in England... I have not ONCE heard that spoken by a Brit.
Also, my views on this controversy...
(//http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/a1AYR06_460s.jpg)
Seriously, all I have heard is people complaining about this. Granted, I don't watch the news... but I haven't heard a single person outside of this thread who wasn't crying bloody murder (eh? ehhhh?) over this.
if you can't understand why is just wrong for people to elevated above the rest because of bloodlines, then I don't know what to say to convince you otherwise.
and frankly I see even ceremonial royalty as offensive.
millions of babies were born this year. Why is this baby so special just because of his last name?
Why should the Windsor Family collect monies from the British just because of Birthright?
Why should they be expected to bow before them?
Why should they be given prestige and respect they did not earn?
fuck the royal family. We fought a war to get rid of them. They can kiss my ass.
The British can do what they like, its not our place to get involved but I think they should end this crap. Become a full fledged republic. They'd still have their culture. same as we do, or the Irish or India.
Something that does cross my mind.
Paula Dean wanted a shirley Temple style wedding with black actors posing as slaves to recreate the Antebellum south. She wasn't actually enslaving anybody it was just a ceremony.
why did that bother you? She wasn't hurting anybody and she gives lots to charities?
QuotePaula Dean wanted a shirley Temple style wedding with black actors posing as slaves to recreate the Antebellum south. She wasn't actually enslaving anybody it was just a ceremony.
why did that bother you? She wasn't hurting anybody and she gives lots to charities?
That didn't bother me, it was her remarks about black people that bothered me.
Now, I can see how blacks (and whites) could be offended by it, and by all means boycott her products or do partake in the event, but I know people who have done FAR worse than that.
Quote...its not our place to get involved but I think they should end this crap. Become a full fledged republic. They'd still have their culture. same as wel do, or the Irish or India.
Like I said above... Britain is doing better than us, so perhaps WE are the barbarians who need to adopt a figurehead monarchy.
Quotemillions of babies were born this year. Why is this baby so special just because of his last name?
Same reason the Clintons, Kennedys, Mccains and Bushes are more important than us; they have clout. That is how it is, that is how it was and that is how it will always be until mankind is long gone from this world. And not even mankind... pretty much all life exhibits this same behaviour.
Blame evolution, not me.
Quotefuck the royal family. We fought a war to get rid of them. They can kiss my ass.
Right. So again it comes down to I should hate them because they were born in a higher social status than me.
No thanks.
Edit: Oh, and to be fair to myself my family moved here LONGGGGGGGGGGGGG after the American revolution, so maybe that's why I don't have this, "hate royalty" stuff as a part of my culture... and on my grandmother's bloodline I can trace it back to Lombardia royalty, so...
Quoteand frankly I see even ceremonial royalty as offensive.
God, American's are silly...
Quote from: "Shiranu"I'm sorry, I just seem to miss how a royal family is this huge crime against humanity.
Bro, do you even Republicanism? :-k
Let me break it down for you:
(//http://karinaandcarissa.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/estates-june_shin.jpg?w=335&h=300)
Hereditary rule = bad
Nobility = bad
It's just plain screwed up to institutionalize a privileged class; people who, through title alone, live lives of sickening extravagance and (optionally) wield vast amounts of unearned power simply through accident of birth.
In summation: Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. :P
QuoteJust because you may disagree with their job, so long as they are not hurting anyone (and infact contributing to society) is not a good enough justification imo to throw away 1500 years of culture.
As other people have already pointed out, the monarchy is not synonymous with British culture and if they abolished the institution tomorrow they would lose nothing but an obsolete political system.
I'd also like to point out that tradition for the sake of tradition is more than a little foolish and that change is nothing to fear.
This conversation made me think about the dozens of celebrity babies that are given the same amount of attention for no reason that nobody seems to care about. For some reason all the news feeds were full of the fucking kardashian/west kid as well, and that one comes from two bloodlines that never seem to have produced anything worthwhile.
It's not just royal families that receive undue attention. It's people putting other people on pedestals for all the stupid reasons that's annoying.
Quote from: "Shiranu"Quote...its not our place to get involved but I think they should end this crap. Become a full fledged republic. They'd still have their culture. same as wel do, or the Irish or India.
Like I said above... Britain is doing better than us, so perhaps WE are the barbarians who need to adopt a figurehead monarchy.
from where I set america should get its head out of its ass and quit voting for shitheads. and england should get its head out of its ass and overthrow the monarchy. Sadly I expect neither.
QuoteQuotemillions of babies were born this year. Why is this baby so special just because of his last name?
Same reason the Clintons, Kennedys, Mccains and Bushes are more important than us; they have clout. That is how it is, that is how it was and that is how it will always be until mankind is long gone from this world. And not even mankind... pretty much all life exhibits this same behaviour.
Blame evolution, not me.
no I blame you. personally. you did this this and I want to know why! :lol:
QuoteQuotefuck the royal family. We fought a war to get rid of them. They can kiss my ass.
Right. So again it comes down to I should hate them because they were born in a higher social status than me.
No thanks.
you should do what you want. hate them or not. I choose to hate them. Although the princess is kinda hot. I'd hit it.
QuoteGod, American's are silly...
indeed. Thats a seperate issue.
Quote from: "Plu"This conversation made me think about the dozens of celebrity babies that are given the same amount of attention for no reason that nobody seems to care about. For some reason all the news feeds were full of the fucking kardashian/west kid as well, and that one comes from two bloodlines that never seem to have produced anything worthwhile.
It's not just royal families that receive undue attention. It's people putting other people on pedestals for all the stupid reasons that's annoying.
damn right! and how no matter how hard we try to avoid it, its crammed down our throats because that shit gets everywhere.
I know Beiber pissed in a mop bucket, then cussed Clinton. then later they made up. I don't give a single fuck but I know it anyway because it was all over the huffington post, facebook, google news, etc.
This royal baby is another piece of news I don't care about, but its all over CNN, Huffington post, facebook and there's a thread here about it. I learned of it despite not caring too. I wish real news that mattered was like this.
Quoteno I blame you. personally. you did this this and I want to know why!
Nooooooo!
QuoteI'd also like to point out that tradition for the sake of tradition is more than a little foolish and that change is nothing to fear.
Meh, I just don't agree with that statement. I am a progressive, but I don't have any problem with people choosing to live, or fund, a traditional institution or life style if they want to. It makes the world far more interesting.
I'd just like to say, I'm all for some traditions. I love american folk music for instance. Its my life's goal to making a living preserving it.
but some traditions are bad. I don't think I'll help preserve this tune.
[youtube:1ygwc5zt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hnt-1CgAJcw[/youtube:1ygwc5zt]
Quote from: "Hydra009"It's just plain screwed up to institutionalize a privileged class; people who, through title alone, live lives of sickening extravagance and (optionally) wield vast amounts of unearned power simply through accident of birth.
Rich people pretty much follow that paradigm. George W Bush ticks every box on that list.
Yep. It follows from the basic rules of economics that we've set up. If your daddy is rich, you live a life of privilege, and if daddy is poor, you don't.
Quote from: "Jason78"Rich people pretty much follow that paradigm. George W Bush ticks every box on that list.
Yep. But the main difference between the nobility and the upper crust is that noble's privileged position is authorized by the state.
Imagine if W, rather than being elected, automatically assumed the presidency. And his children after that. And their children.
Personally, I love a good show. Specially when it involves history and I'm not apologetic about it.
Gerard
(who is a loyal subject of..... uhhh....)
Quote from: "Shiranu"Like I said above... Britain is doing better than us, so perhaps WE are the barbarians who need to adopt a figurehead monarchy.
Many countries are doing better than us in different ways. Rest assured, the commonality is not their constitutional monarchy. Nor is it the reason for their success.
And to even suggest that the US adopt a monarchy...
(//http://i.imgur.com/816uC.gif)
Quote from: "Shiranu"Quote from: "Hydra009"I'd also like to point out that tradition for the sake of tradition is more than a little foolish and that change is nothing to fear.
Meh, I just don't agree with that statement. I am a progressive, but I don't have any problem with people choosing to live, or fund, a traditional institution or life style if they want to. It makes the world far more interesting.
Then we have a huge difference of opinion. I'm more than willing to change, or if necessary utterly abolish, any tradition that does not work in the here and now. Hence my atheism, among other changes. Old traditions give way to new ones. I live for the present and future, not the past. The past is dead.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Shiranu"Like I said above... Britain is doing better than us, so perhaps WE are the barbarians who need to adopt a figurehead monarchy.
Many countries are doing better than us in different ways. Rest assured, the commonality is not their constitutional monarchy. Nor is it the reason for their success.
And to even suggest that the US adopt a monarchy...
[ Image (//http://i.imgur.com/816uC.gif) ]
That's a shame.... I was looking forward to applying for the job of hereditary constitutional Emperor of the United States.....
Quote from: "Hydra009"The past is dead.
But what lives has been made by it. That can be of some value.
Gerard
Quote from: "Hydra009"Imagine if W, rather than being elected, automatically assumed the presidency.
I don't have to imagine. I can just remember the US 2000 presidential elections!
Quote from: "Gerard"Personally, I love a good show. Specially when it involves history and I'm not apologetic about it.
Gerard
(who is a loyal subject of..... uhhh....)
And your king is, uh, wait a minute......
What if your queen abdicated and nobody cared? Oh, wait. That happened. :-s
LOL this thread is quite entertaining. I personally don't care, they have no real power, only influence.
Influence is power.
Quote from: "Gerard"Quote from: "Hydra009"The past is dead.
But what lives has been made by it. That can be of some value.
True enough.
Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Hydra009"Imagine if W, rather than being elected, automatically assumed the presidency.
I don't have to imagine. I can just remember the US 2000 presidential elections!
HAHAHA!!! =D>
[youtube:psc1oiq8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw[/youtube:psc1oiq8]
[youtube:psc1oiq8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2IO5ifWKdw[/youtube:psc1oiq8]
Now everyone shut the fuck up already.
Edit: forgot the second video.
(//http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb366/magicrob99/prince_baby_raptor1_zps66a1d68d.jpg)
Holy shit! It looks like David Icke was right all along.... :shock:
Oh crap now the privildged little shit has a name......AND IT'S GEORGE. Only one thing in history that happened when the main charactor was named George and that was George Washington. Okay some of you would point out George S. Patton, but you have to admitt he was a glory seeking ego maniac as well as an effective general.
George Jones; King George I,II,&III; George Bush I & II, so on and so forth...!
LOL! I purposely did not click on any links regarding the little shits name. I learned anyway. LMAO! I wish shit that mattered was this hard to ignore.
Once again..the little Georgie Porgy..
You knew the photo's would come out sooner or later..
(//http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q490/atheola/37-funny-pictures-505.jpg)
I'm not sick of the royal baby for one reason. I never cared in the first place. I did hear he got accepted in to Oxford though.
Kid barely knows how to belch, and he's already like a duke or something. Yeesh.
I hear the royal penis gets washed daily.. other than that I could care less. I'm only concerned with his hygiene.
Quote from: "hillbillyatheist"LOL! I purposely did not click on any links regarding the little shits name. I learned anyway. LMAO! I wish shit that mattered was this hard to ignore.
Yeah, seriously. This is ridiculous :( I should stop opening this thread.
The Royal shit and pee maker now has a name BIG WHOOPTY DOO!
Well, the royals have been around a longggg time and apparently not going away so revel in the babydom and get over it..or not. Either way since they won't be dropping any cash my way anytime soon it really doesn't matter if the kid was born with black skin, nappy hair and a 12 inch dick or red hair and freckles and named Duffy.. Just another kid.. Boy George..
Quote from: "stromboli"Kid barely knows how to belch, and he's already like a duke or something. Yeesh.
Yeah - the entrance requirement is shockingly low for that job.
Meanwhile, it's four days later and the American media is still carrying on about the royal fuck.
//http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/07/26/for-love-royal-baby-prince-george/
QuotePublished July 26, 2013
FoxNews.com
i really don't give a shit what the Brits do, but for the US this is embarrassing. It isn't as if there isn't real news in the world that should be covered.
I was hoping he would be born on my birthday, so that he would have to live in the shadow of the almighty Tim. Close, but no cigar.
Quote from: "Shiranu"Quotewhat is it a symbol of?
The will and strength of the British people, an institution that goes back 1500 years and united various tribes into one greater whole, rulers that protected the Isles from foreign invaders, rulers that expanded the borders of Britain to the point that the sun never set on the British Empire.
Quotethat some people are better than others because of their bloodlines?
And we don't have that in non-monarchies?
Ever heard of the Clintons? The Kardashians? The Bushes? The Trumps, the Hiltons, the Kennedys'?
That's a human thing, that has nothing to do with monarchy.
So what? That's just as stupid. We don't have hereditary doctors, scientists, teachers, nurses, firefighters, etc. Why have hereditary leaders? Royalty represents the notion that certain people deserve to be in charge just because their parents were in charge, and they deserve to be taken care of by the people off of whose taxes they live. Americans have this romantic notion of royal families--based on cartoons, fairy tales, and movies, apparently--that they are these benevolent rulers. This has never been the case at all. Even a cursory reading of history shows that, for the most part, royals have been egotistical assholes trampling all over the rights of their subjects, taking whatever they wanted from whomever they wanted. It is only thanks to ordinary people fighting for better treatment (often with their lives) that, over the years, the royal animal has lost all its teeth. It needs to just lie down and die already--alongside the Catholic Church, which is equally irrelevant.
Whatever. The Brits can do whatever they like with their stupid, worthless, ugly royalty. I just don't get why Americans are so enamored of them. I guess it's for the same reason they obsess over movie stars that are equally spoiled.