Queens' Diamond Jubilee Celebrations ...

rbkwp

Mythical Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Posts
79,269
Media
1
Likes
44,949
Points
608
Location
Auckland (New Zealand)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Last edited:

redz_rule

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Posts
2,221
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
73
Sexuality
No Response
Lol Grace Jones and the hula hoop. Impressive, but WTF? You just know there was someone with their finger hovering over the button to cut her mic the entire time she was on stage..
 

bigbull29

Worshipped Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Posts
7,577
Media
52
Likes
14,090
Points
343
Location
State College (Pennsylvania, United States)
Sexuality
Pansexual
Gender
Male
I am so with you there. I can't believe anyone would support or get excited about a family of such dysfunctional spoiled brats that are born into immense privelege and have no relevance in today's world. I think that commonwealth countries like Canada should dump the royals as well. Why she is the head of state here is completely beyond me. :confused: The Americans got it right dumping them in 1783.

They are glorified welfare recipients :biggrin1:
 

ConanTheBarber

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Posts
5,306
Media
0
Likes
2,087
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
They are glorified welfare recipients :biggrin1:

Well, I like what Zyz posted:

For reference with respect to costs: the civil list is given in exchange for ceding the income of the Crown Estates to the Treasury. The net income from The Queen is substantially more than is paid out (which is no longer tax exempt). So commenting on how much the civil list costs is an entirely spurious argument, usually peddled by the ignorant.

If that makes them welfare recipients, then may every nation be so lucky as to have thousands.

I can imagine anyone not liking the monarchy. I'm not really addicted to the Royals myself. But I do like the connection they give to the past, and I do like the idea that the head of state not exercise real power.

If the monarchy is abolished, the world will go on, and twenty years later, especially for younger people, it will seem like a ancient relic had met an overdue death.

And it's going to happen ... certainly in the next fifty years, I'd say.

But I think it will be a sad change.
 

ManofThunder

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Posts
4,820
Media
52
Likes
1,913
Points
248
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
To summarise how I feel about the whole thing: "I don't hate the woman, but she is just a woman." Some people believe the monarchy are better than everyone else. When you're not part of the monarchy, that's beyond silly and completely depressing. They do attract tourism and aren't evil people, but I don't see why the jubilee needs to be celebrated. She isn't a soldier, dodging bullets and saving lives - she has shook hands for 60 years. It's like being commended for doing a comfortable job. I know any excuse for a party is a good one, but I don't like parties. :tongue: If we had massive celebrations for Shakespeare and Bertrand Russell, I wouldn't mind - but we don't. Fundamentally, I can't find anything to be excited about.
 

D_Bubba_Butter

Account Disabled
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Posts
2,814
Media
0
Likes
95
Points
83
To summarise how I feel about the whole thing: "I don't hate the woman, but she is just a woman." Some people believe the monarchy are better than everyone else. When you're not part of the monarchy, that's beyond silly and completely depressing. They do attract tourism and aren't evil people, but I don't see why the jubilee needs to be celebrated. She isn't a soldier, dodging bullets and saving lives - she has shook hands for 60 years. It's like being commended for doing a comfortable job. I know any excuse for a party is a good one, but I don't like parties. :tongue: If we had massive celebrations for Shakespeare and Bertrand Russell, I wouldn't mind - but we don't. Fundamentally, I can't find anything to be excited about.


While I can respect anyone's position on whether constitutional monarchy is the most appropriate form of government, your assessment of what The Queen does betrays a staggering degree of ignorance about what the monarch's role entails. It isn't simply state banquets, wearing sparkly headgear & dishing out gongs. However, I do understand that some people have difficulty grasping this & just how important the principle is in maintaining stability over the long term.

And exactly how have you missed the World Shakespeare Festival this year?
 

ManofThunder

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Posts
4,820
Media
52
Likes
1,913
Points
248
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
While I can respect anyone's position on whether constitutional monarchy is the most appropriate form of government, your assessment of what The Queen does betrays a staggering degree of ignorance about what the monarch's role entails. It isn't simply state banquets, wearing sparkly headgear & dishing out gongs. However, I do understand that some people have difficulty grasping this & just how important the principle is in maintaining stability over the long term.

And exactly how have you missed the World Shakespeare Festival this year?
I don't care 'whether constitutional monarchy is the most appropriate form of government' - I was talking about the jubilee. It wasn't an assessment, it was two sentences. I don't hate the monarchy, as I said. Regarding what the role entails, last time I checked, she wasn't literally dodging bullets. :tongue: I think you've misunderstood me. I simply don't believe she is magical and does her job against all odds - it has some perks. My 'assessment' was simply a way to explain my position. She does do a job, yes - but it isn't the hardest job in the world. She doesn't run around like Rambo and fight wars single-handed. Considering the job they do, a soldier earns very little. She gets a castle. At night, she has a warm bed to sleep in. Simply, she has guaranteed comfort. I don't hate politicians and they do an important job, but they don't get huge parties. The police do a good job, but they don't live in a castle - they lose their jobs. That's her reward for doing the job. I understand the role of royalty, but they shouldn't be thought of as god-like. It's as ridiculous as the worship of Lady Gaga or anyone else.

When I hear a hard-working, single mother saying that someone with a crown is better than her own child - it makes me sad. That woman is brain-washed by all this jubilee nonsense. Yes, she does a job. So what? It's an excuse for a party - that's fine. That's all it should be. The Shakespeare Festival (and other events) didn't get as much publicity as this - it should have. It's when you put one person on a pedestal that harm is done. A supermodel is seen in every magazine, by every girl. That girl then feels ugly because she isn't pencil-thin. That mother felt the same about the jubilee. She said something along the lines of, "The royalty are better than us, you're just a working-class girl, sweetheart." Whatever you may think, I'm not against the monarchy. I'm against the glorification of people born with lots of money, horses and carriages. For that mother and daughter, the celebrations are little more than salt in the wound of their poor existence. When Windsor Castle is your weekend home, you're already living a fairytale existence and can live without Grace Jones and her hula-hoop.

That's all I'm saying. I'm not suggesting a revolution, I simply don't agree that they 'deserve' these huge celebrations when they work as hard as lots of people. As I've said, I don't hate the monarchy. But personally, I can't get excited about the celebrations when I have seen the negative impact of them, fail to see the reason for royal-worship and dislike parties. :smile:
 

rbkwp

Mythical Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Posts
79,269
Media
1
Likes
44,949
Points
608
Location
Auckland (New Zealand)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
My take on it, a coloured from the Colonies..

Royalists tend to be Loyalists, to humankind
can readily accept a persons role in life, unlike some
give me a steadfast Genuine Monarch figure any day
as compared to the Presidential no bodys, many tend to eventually despise .

I would like
to see, some of these persons born with a silver spoon in there mouths
(thru NO fault nor desire of there own)
coached from birth, to serve
and then see how they perform ..

Those who have given ALL of there life,
deserve whatever reward the people see fit to give
evidenced by the millions who love her for the service she has given


or
it could be termed sharing lpsg shit talk ..
 

1958ST

Legendary Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Posts
3,289
Media
0
Likes
2,105
Points
268
Location
US
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Think of the continuity she represents. She served in WWII, when her family chose to remain in London. Her first prime minister was Winston Churchill. Churchhill as a small boy heard W E Gladstone, when prime minister, speak about how as a small boy he had watched the bonfires celebrating the victory of Waterloo in 1815.
 

eurotop40

Admired Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
4,430
Media
0
Likes
977
Points
333
Location
Zurich (Switzerland)
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I don't care 'whether constitutional monarchy is the most appropriate form of government' - I was talking about the jubilee. It wasn't an assessment, it was two sentences. I don't hate the monarchy, as I said. Regarding what the role entails, last time I checked, she wasn't literally dodging bullets. :tongue: I think you've misunderstood me. I simply don't believe she is magical and does her job against all odds - it has some perks. My 'assessment' was simply a way to explain my position. She does do a job, yes - but it isn't the hardest job in the world. She doesn't run around like Rambo and fight wars single-handed. Considering the job they do, a soldier earns very little. She gets a castle. At night, she has a warm bed to sleep in. Simply, she has guaranteed comfort. I don't hate politicians and they do an important job, but they don't get huge parties. The police do a good job, but they don't live in a castle - they lose their jobs. That's her reward for doing the job. I understand the role of royalty, but they shouldn't be thought of as god-like. It's as ridiculous as the worship of Lady Gaga or anyone else.

When I hear a hard-working, single mother saying that someone with a crown is better than her own child - it makes me sad. That woman is brain-washed by all this jubilee nonsense. Yes, she does a job. So what? It's an excuse for a party - that's fine. That's all it should be. The Shakespeare Festival (and other events) didn't get as much publicity as this - it should have. It's when you put one person on a pedestal that harm is done. A supermodel is seen in every magazine, by every girl. That girl then feels ugly because she isn't pencil-thin. That mother felt the same about the jubilee. She said something along the lines of, "The royalty are better than us, you're just a working-class girl, sweetheart." Whatever you may think, I'm not against the monarchy. I'm against the glorification of people born with lots of money, horses and carriages. For that mother and daughter, the celebrations are little more than salt in the wound of their poor existence. When Windsor Castle is your weekend home, you're already living a fairytale existence and can live without Grace Jones and her hula-hoop.

That's all I'm saying. I'm not suggesting a revolution, I simply don't agree that they 'deserve' these huge celebrations when they work as hard as lots of people. As I've said, I don't hate the monarchy. But personally, I can't get excited about the celebrations when I have seen the negative impact of them, fail to see the reason for royal-worship and dislike parties. :smile:

That's nothing new. It's the recipe from ancient Rome to keep the populace quiet:
"Panem et circenses."
 

D_Bubba_Butter

Account Disabled
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Posts
2,814
Media
0
Likes
95
Points
83
@MoT: you'll probably find this misplaced, but I feel sad that you're so jaded. Hard-working, single mothers saying that The Queen is better than their own child?! So in what context have you heard this? The mind boggles as to how a situation arises in which a woman has to compare a lady in her 80s with a child... But that kind of illogical argument makes reasoned discussion of any subject very difficult, so I'm just going to have to park it there.

@Eurotop40: panem et circenses is hardly the model for government at present. I dare say it would be more cost effective than the welfare state, so perhaps we should give it a go.

@rbkwp: your point is a good one. From what you say & living on Great Barrier Island, I'm guessing you may be Maori, in which case you are more likely than the average Brit to appreciate the importance of heritage & tradition, loyalty & service.
 

Deno

Cherished Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Posts
4,631
Media
1
Likes
410
Points
303
Sexuality
No Response
The government is making all these cuts (Schools, Hospitals, etc) yet they waste all this money on this meaningless nonsense. I don't know one person that's excited by this in the UK. You'd think everyone in Britain was struggling to sleep through excitement with the way the BBC reports it.

The UK has been a laughing stock for years with the monarchy, isn't it time we dump them posh lot and get ourselves into the 21st century. Lets leave the 16th century behind, eh?

a laughing stock where. did u see the people at this thing. ya no one came.
 
7

798686

Guest
For reference with respect to costs: the civil list is given in exchange for ceding the income of the Crown Estates to the Treasury. The net income from The Queen is substantially more than is paid out (which is no longer tax exempt). So commenting on how much the civil list costs is an entirely spurious argument, usually peddled by the ignorant.

While I can respect anyone's position on whether constitutional monarchy is the most appropriate form of government, your assessment of what The Queen does betrays a staggering degree of ignorance about what the monarch's role entails. It isn't simply state banquets, wearing sparkly headgear & dishing out gongs. However, I do understand that some people have difficulty grasping this & just how important the principle is in maintaining stability over the long term.
Your comments have been excellent, Zyz - thanks. :smile:

Obviously there are people for and against the monarchy. Personally, I think - despite mis-steps over the years, they (especially the Queen and Prince Phil) have done an excellent job.

As I've said before, the monarchy lends Britain a huge sense of occasion and gravitas, that would otherwise be lacking, and is a source of endless fascination (and tourist ££) for people from other countries. The wedding last year generated a huge amount of global publicity for the UK (as with the jubilee) which is probably priceless in terms of advertising impact. Allied to this year's Olympics, it's added a much-needed shot in the arm to a fairly beleaguered UK.

I agree with your point about the civil list - it's dwarfed by the income (which goes to the treasury) from the Crown Estates. Apparently - there are moves to replace the civil list income with a percentage of Crown Estate revenue - so the Royals won't be taking any tax-payers' money at all - whilst still providing a touch of glamour, and a lot of stability to the UK.

I do think the Queen's role has been difficult and demanding. The amount of engagements is staggering - I'd be fatigued after just this weekend. Plus, the wealth of experience and advice she has to share with PMs, and the great decorum and statesmanship she's displayed over the years can't be over-estimated.

Here's a short clip of the concert and fireworks, to round things off. :D
Altho - I was mystified as to why the French flag was projected onto the Palace for a while, lmao.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
S

superbot

Guest
To summarise how I feel about the whole thing: "I don't hate the woman, but she is just a woman." Some people believe the monarchy are better than everyone else. When you're not part of the monarchy, that's beyond silly and completely depressing. They do attract tourism and aren't evil people, but I don't see why the jubilee needs to be celebrated. She isn't a soldier, dodging bullets and saving lives - she has shook hands for 60 years. It's like being commended for doing a comfortable job. I know any excuse for a party is a good one, but I don't like parties. :tongue: If we had massive celebrations for Shakespeare and Bertrand Russell, I wouldn't mind - but we don't. Fundamentally, I can't find anything to be excited about.
If you are going to have a serious arguement...do so.
But what has 'dodging bullets' 'Bertarm Russell' or 'single parents' got to do with anything....I'm surprised you haven't reached for that other favourite non arguement, the NURSES....
 
7

798686

Guest
To summarise how I feel about the whole thing: "I don't hate the woman, but she is just a woman." Some people believe the monarchy are better than everyone else. When you're not part of the monarchy, that's beyond silly and completely depressing. They do attract tourism and aren't evil people, but I don't see why the jubilee needs to be celebrated. She isn't a soldier, dodging bullets and saving lives - she has shook hands for 60 years. It's like being commended for doing a comfortable job. I know any excuse for a party is a good one, but I don't like parties. :tongue: If we had massive celebrations for Shakespeare and Bertrand Russell, I wouldn't mind - but we don't. Fundamentally, I can't find anything to be excited about.
@MoT - I wouldn't say it IS a comfortable job. Sure, there are privileges, but there's also a huge curtailing of personal freedom, especially concerning expressing opinion. It's also a huge responsibility, and has attracted vehement criticism (at times relentless - eg: early 1990s).

I don't care 'whether constitutional monarchy is the most appropriate form of government' - I was talking about the jubilee. It wasn't an assessment, it was two sentences. I don't hate the monarchy, as I said. Regarding what the role entails, last time I checked, she wasn't literally dodging bullets. :tongue: I think you've misunderstood me. I simply don't believe she is magical and does her job against all odds - it has some perks. My 'assessment' was simply a way to explain my position. She does do a job, yes - but it isn't the hardest job in the world. She doesn't run around like Rambo and fight wars single-handed. Considering the job they do, a soldier earns very little. She gets a castle. At night, she has a warm bed to sleep in. Simply, she has guaranteed comfort. I don't hate politicians and they do an important job, but they don't get huge parties. The police do a good job, but they don't live in a castle - they lose their jobs. That's her reward for doing the job. I understand the role of royalty, but they shouldn't be thought of as god-like. It's as ridiculous as the worship of Lady Gaga or anyone else.

When I hear a hard-working, single mother saying that someone with a crown is better than her own child - it makes me sad. That woman is brain-washed by all this jubilee nonsense. Yes, she does a job. So what? It's an excuse for a party - that's fine. That's all it should be. The Shakespeare Festival (and other events) didn't get as much publicity as this - it should have. It's when you put one person on a pedestal that harm is done. A supermodel is seen in every magazine, by every girl. That girl then feels ugly because she isn't pencil-thin. That mother felt the same about the jubilee. She said something along the lines of, "The royalty are better than us, you're just a working-class girl, sweetheart." Whatever you may think, I'm not against the monarchy. I'm against the glorification of people born with lots of money, horses and carriages. For that mother and daughter, the celebrations are little more than salt in the wound of their poor existence. When Windsor Castle is your weekend home, you're already living a fairytale existence and can live without Grace Jones and her hula-hoop.

That's all I'm saying. I'm not suggesting a revolution, I simply don't agree that they 'deserve' these huge celebrations when they work as hard as lots of people. As I've said, I don't hate the monarchy. But personally, I can't get excited about the celebrations when I have seen the negative impact of them, fail to see the reason for royal-worship and dislike parties. :smile:
Not sure who this woman is, but I don't know of many people who think the Queen is somehow 'better' than them.

The jubilee is a celebration of her role and the way she's carried it out - and the impact it's had on the UK, Commonwealth and the world for nearly 60 years, which is an impressively long time to perform such a high-profile job.

It's also a way for the public to unite, enjoy themselves and add a touch of excitement to an otherwise pretty bleak few years. I would say it's as much for the public's benefit as hers.

I agree some roles are tougher - but many are less tough. And while we have a choice in what role we perform - she was given hers whether she wanted it or not.
 
D

deleted3782

Guest
Speaking personally, as a white Anglo-Saxon Prostestant Yank, it's all fascinating to watch. I don't want a monarch for my own country, but its nice to see the citizens on the streets waving flags and being proud of their nation (a nationality that isn't known for chest-beating or expressions of pride). The UK is one of my favorite places to visit...I've always wanted to live there for a bit...and I hope to go back...not to mention that lots British guys are uber hot and on top of that they have huge wangs!

Congrats on the long reign of your monarch, and I hope these celebrations might provide more stability...especially in the context of the increasing instability on the Continenent.

*Starts countdown till the Platinum Jubilee*