Posted on 04/16/2011 8:21:29 PM PDT by TheDingoAteMyBaby
We do not have inherited power, we have inherited wealth.
Garbage! Of course you do. You may not like it, but it's inevitable. Wealth brings power.
Wealth that is earned, fairly or not, but it is earned.
If wealth is inherited, how is it earned? Obviously it was earned by someone in the past, but not by the person who inherits it, who may or may not be a good custodian of it.
wealth is always subject to the consent of our free people.
You mean the government of the people has the right to simply take it off those who are undeserving of it? Isn't that the politics of envy? I thought we were in favor of fair tax on these boards?
The queen and the royals, by accident of birth, claim dominance over the Brit Parliament and Brit people.
They claim nothing of the kind. The Queen is a constitutional monarch. There is no doubt as to who is actually in charge.
Free Irishmen never put up with it and neither will I.
And they'll force that freedom on everyone else. If people demur, they can just be bombed into agreeing. And given the economic disaster that Eire is, you could ask "Hey, missing Lizzie yet?"
My ancestors paid in blood for every freedom we have and I would never soil their sacrifice with any even symbolic nod towards any king or queen or royals of any kind.
Given the nature of the current encumbent, how's electing your head of State working out?
They claim no such thing. A civil war was fought 350 years ago to establish once and for all the principle that Parliament, not the monarch, is sovereign.
Any power that is derived from that wealth is always subject to the consent of our free people.
The status of the British monarch as constitutional head of state is likewise entirely suibject to the consent of our free people, expressed through Parliament. The monarchy could be abolished at any time should the free people, governing through Parliament, so decide.
The 'my government' stuff is just one of those little anachronistic rituals which we have to keep going to keep American tourists happy...has absolutely nothing to do with the realities of power.
This would be filed at the bottom of my list of things to worry about.
Britain never let the population of the island decide its future; it sectioned off one piece it had loaded with its supporters and used that as justification for keeping it.
If southern California voted to join Mexico, I don’t think most Americans would view it as a legally binding arrangement and feel compelled to give it up. Would they?
The occupation of Northern Ireland is indefensible.
Well put; Irishmen are citizens, not subjects.
Unfortunately it could have dire consequences for those of us in the UK. If this isn’t altered, it could cause a major constitutional crisis. The radical left in the UK would dearly love to scrap the constitutional monarchy as they see it as a bar to their socialist paradise. If Kate and William are blessed with a daughter, they could use that as leverage.
That is simply untrue (and its also downright insulting to the Unionist people). The nationalist Irish members of parliament astutely guided through a home rule bill in 1912 and the British Government accepted it and passed it through parliament. It only required the King's signature to become law. It was the people of Ulster who rose up against the act. See the Ulster covenant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Covenant
In the second place, why would they want to do what you suggest? Is Northern Ireland so valuable a piece of real estate? Err, no. Its been nothing but trouble. Why would they want to hold onto it? For what purpose? Tyranny for tyrannies sake? Please...
If southern California voted to join Mexico, I don’t think most Americans would view it as a legally binding arrangement and feel compelled to give it up. Would they? If Ireland was part of the United Kingdom and voted to secede, I don't think most Britons would view it as a legally binding arrangement and feel compelled to give it up. Would they?
You see? It's exactly the same argument. You complain that part of Ireland didn't have the right to opt out of independence, but you have no problem that a part of the United Kingdom voted itself out. The British argument is simple and it is clear. Self-determination. If people want out they can go, if they want in they stay. What is your problem with that? Forget how the horrid situation all began. At this instant YOU are the one who is arguing for coercion.
The occupation of Northern Ireland is indefensible.
As it's not an occupation, it doesn't need to be defended.
Incidentally, you do realise there is no such thing these days, don't you?
The people of Ireland (ALL of Ireland) would have supported independence for ALL of Ireland in a landslide. At the time, Northern Ireland was economically worthwhile (the Titanic was built in its shipyards, though Catholics weren’t allowed to work on it - there’s karma for you). It was only when globalization did to their industry what it had done to Britain’s industry that London lost interest in the whole thing.
The “unionist” people are visiting transplants, nothing else; their threats to bomb London if the British withdraw is the reason why it is still occupied.
I've never heard of unionists threatening to bomb London if the British withdraw. That's pretty crappy republican propoganda. Threaten to bomb Dublin yes. Threaten to defy and disobey a United Ireland government yes. And they are not bluffing either.
Just remember that the "visiting transplants" as you insultingly call them have been in Ireland longer than your people have been in Northern America.
oh and yes... you are right...at the time Northern Ireland was economically viable. Only northern Ireland (principally because the despised transplants had MADE it so) and of course, they didnt want to leave.
What is the purpose of a queen on an elevated throne, with her country's elected representatives at her feet, whom bow at her entrance like Obama with the Saudi king, stating "my government" will do this and that, with no tourists about.
That symbolism is an insult to the truly free whose ancestors were brutalized and starved to death by the queen's ancestors. This obsolete symbolic groveling is pathetic and as embarrassing as Obama's behavior.
Inherited wealth offers the potential for power, nothing more. Look at how the Kennedys have faded from political power, with all their inherited money. Any number of the born poor are now in political leadership all over America, that's the way it will always be.
Inherited wealth is earned by accident of birth, all over the world in every society. It's what you do with that wealth that determines what political power you accumulate. I agree that economic power may not be earned by ones individual labor, I am speaking of political leadership.
There is no such thing as a fair tax. All governments consider the ability to pay. But that choice in America is still done by the elected.
Power has no right to be inherited. If there is no doubt who's in charge in Britain at least get the royals out of the Parliament unless they get elected themselves. BTW, why don't they ever run for office?
How has Ireland imposed its will on anyone?
There are many countries struggling financially, that's hardly a call for a monarchy dictatorship.
We make mistakes electorally in America that we get to correct every 4 years. But we the people make them, not a dictator or a ruling class. Obama's election is now seen a mistake by the majority of those that voted for him. But the great symbolism of that election remains, that even our once most abused minority can see one of its own become the most powerful person in the world.
Clinging to symbolism enslaves Brit thinking from allowing that kind of elevation to power. That is the evil of allowing royals to claim social and political superiority, even if it is supposedly for appearances only.
Bizarre! You’d think they would mull abolishing the monarchy.
At the heart of your claim is that England is somehow under the ownership of the Royal Family - rather than just the Royal Properties of England (a rather substantial amount of wealth).
FWIW.....
First born child: no matter the sex - is the “Numinorian” system - as described by J.R.R. Tolkien.
The general rule is that the first child to physically exit mom's body is "first born". Doesn't matter if twin comes out a few minutes later.
Not true, 3 slave states remained in the Union. S Carolina voted to become an independent country and not be a part of the Confederacy. 4 counties in N Carolina voted not to join NC's secession and never did. There was hardly uniform agreement in Dixie.
Most in the South knew they had no chance, especially without foreign help.
The bottom line is that imperial monarchy-driven colonial attitudes and greed brought the Brits to Ireland, created the oppression there and they have no one but themselves to blame if London gets bombed.
How does Britain find itself a heartbeat away from verstehen und sprechen sie deutch and can't get its Irish neighbor to help? Perhaps being a better neighbor and America wouldn't have had to bail them out twice with our blood and treasure that would never have been created in a monarchy.
Alexandre Dumas wrote about the hidden twin of a French Monarch in “the Man in the Iron Mask”.
They thought the claims of the second born twin was too likely to lead to civil war - what if they mixed up the babies sometime during their youth, etc.
Really? So terrorist attacks targeting civilians are justified due to historic circumstances and in retaliation/reaction to political domination or oppression?
And the blame is to be put upon the victim of these terrorist attacks due to their historic crimes?
Wow, you sound JUST LIKE the Muslim world after 9-11.
Hmm..
Kate is pregnant and the family knows it is a girl, so in turn for this change in tradition, they will keep their mouth shut until after the wedding.
The implication that the monarchy somehow prevents something similar happening in Britain is manifestly ludicrous. At least half a dozen Prime Ministers in the last century have been of working class or otherwise humble backgrounds, and have reached the top through their own abilities and the will of the people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.