Replies

Whoe decides he was a facist? Note, I'm not defending him. But who exactly has the power to decide what constitutes hate speech? Parliament? Very dangerous subject to deal with, deciding what is and isn't hate speech.

You might not have state sponsored attacks on religion, however your country sure appears to be losing it's traditional Christian faith rather quickly. Your Church of England appears rather enemic. I won't get into the fact that the Church of England is headed by a monarch.

As if republics have been tried very often throughout history. I believe Rome was at it's greatest when it was a republic. Rome collapsed during the period it was a monarchy/empire. So did China, Germany, Russia, British Empire, etc. It scares me to think your freedoms rest on your monarchy. Your monarchy is pretty powerless. The power in Britian resides in Parliament, no?

Us Americans never "lost" the monarchy. We overthrew it, got rid of it. I don't really think too many people give a hoot about the life and times of your royalty.

It's really too bad Britian decided to become a socialist state after WWII. I think the heritage of the British empire has been a good thing. It's too bad your navy doesn't rule the waves any longer.

Thank God for the U.S. Navy though!

Later

who exactly has the power to decide what constitutes hate speech?

12 men good and true. (That is a jury in case you were wondering.)

Also the crime is not hate-speach (which sounds terribly Orwellian, but then Orwell's real name was Blair so perhaps it is apposite), it is incitement to racial hatred the act is the incitement.

Your Church of England appears rather enemic.

That rather depends on which bits you visit. The bits I go to are perfectly sound.

I won't get into the fact that the Church of England is headed by a monarch.

It is not. The Queen is Supreme Governor on Earth of the Church of England, the Church of England is headed by Christ. Also when we're talking about state-sponsered attacks on religion, surely a Christian Monarch would prevent such things, it does here.

I believe Rome was at it's greatest when it was a republic. Rome collapsed during the period it was a monarchy/empire.

Indeed, many republics have shown virility in their early stages, however they descend to decadence. The Roman Empire was never a proper Monarchy at least until it went east to Byzantium (which was over thrown by another Monarchy).

So did China, Germany, Russia, British Empire, etc.

The German Empire ended in 1918, after which there was the disasterous Weimar Republic, and the rise of Hitler. The Russian Empire lost its Monarchy, and became the Soviet Union. The Chinese Monarchy fell, and was replaced by a civil-war between the Nationalists and the Communists. In other words, the Monarchy goes, and shit happens.

The British Empire is a very different matter, the Empire was external and very different to the British homeland (if I may call it such), the process of moving from Empire to Commonwealth was well under way before the great losses of territory in the post-war era (witness Canadian confederation, the formation of Australia &c.). The fall of the external empire was not the fall of the Monarchy, and the country remained undamaged. The Monarchy still survives in several parts of the Commonwealth. Consider at this point Algeria, and the effect that this had on France; the French Republic collapsed because of the loss of part of an external empire; Britain with her firm foundation in the Monarchy suffered no similar fate.

Your monarchy is pretty powerless. The power in Britian resides in Parliament, no?

Well it's al rather complex and controversial. A few points to consider, first the sovereign constitutes a 'house' of Parliament, and can (in theory) veto any legislative proposal. Secondly, the Monarch is the culmination of the executive, and could (in theory) veto any executive action. Now let's imagine that a Prime Minister wished to form a tyranny, the Queen could (and would) simply sack him and call a new election. The powers of the Monarch are massive, but reserved.

Us Americans never "lost" the monarchy. We overthrew it, got rid of it. I don't really think too many people give a hoot about the life and times of your royalty.

So why does barely a day go by without a thread or few appearing discussing the smallest aspect of a Royal's life? Face it, America is obssesed. These new tapes about Diana, Princess of Wales, were not shown in Britain, we've got over her; but in the U.S. it's still massive news.