C O M M U N I T Y   F O R U M

Re: British Views on the Royals
Post Follow Up
Posted by: Allan-John Marsh on November 3, 1999
In Reply to: Re: British Views on the Royals
Posted by Daren Swanick on May 13, 1999
Subject: Re: British Views on the Royals
> Sorry friend but I must once again disagree. Britain will still have it's "historic links", whether or not we have a monarch on the throne. If tourists come here for a lesson in history, then I say lets give them history and relegate the royals into the dim and distant past where they belong.

That's not true at all. The monarchies do not belong in the distant past as they have always existed. If tourists come to Britain, then the monarchy is something they might well come to see - statistics prove that. This political correctness is great though isn't it: we show people what we want to show them, and not how things really are. That way, you can cover up the monarchy if you wish.

> As for having had the monarchy for 3000 years, albeit with some form of disruption in between, it goes to show how behind the times we are. The celts disbanded their monarchy 2000 years ago, (see Di Bello Gallico - Caesar), good for them!

There were many Celtic monarchs long after the Romans had left. The last royal house of Cumbria existed until just before the Norman invasion. We are not behind in the times at all - Republics and Monarchies have been around almost for the same period. Republics can also be said to be flawed and lethargic.

> If you want to have a system of privilege where people look down on you owing to their birth "status", then I feel sorry for you.

Don't feel sorry for me. Peerage is a good thing. Tradition is a healthy thing. Culture is a brilliant thing.

> Oh, before I go for now, let me remind you that basically speaking the only reasons why the current royals came to be in the long losts mists of time that is our history, is that their ancestors hit our ancestors harder with their clubs to assume the lofy ranks of the royals and aristocracy. They are made of the same biological material as you and I, and do not deserve any more repect or consideration than the ordinary man in the street.

Nobody is saying they are above men, nor that they warrant greater respect. They do however warrant respect, and deserve recognition for the role they play. If there was any smashing over the heads in the past, then it was in the distant past. Our history is one of the small guy under the yoke of the powerful man, but that stemmed from many sources, and the monarchy was only one source of discontempt. Do I hear your calls for the disbandonment of the church too along these lines?

> I reassert my original declaration. The monarchy and the aristocracy are a dying breed, their days ARE numbered and they WILL disappear whether your simpering GREAT BRITAIN mentality likes it or not.

Well, considering that we now must preserve at all costs the cultures of ethnic mintorities, and indigenous culture is being swept under the mat faster than Britons are leaving their homeland for greener pastures, I would say that any aspect of British identity will indeed not exist before long ... oh, but that's a GOOD thing isn't it. It's good that we can't be British in Britain. It's in line with 'Cool Britannia' and everything the politically correct hold so dear. I suppose that the demise of the monarchy is just one of many points to be considered in obtaining the British-free Britain.


Back to Main Forum

   Copyright ©1996, 1997, 1998 Britannia Internet Magazine. Design by Unica Multimedia.
Corporate Hospitality Concert Tickets London Theatre Tickets