Celebrating British Royalty Is Anathema To America

The Federalsit ^ | April 26, 2018 | David Marcus

[C19fan]

A baby was recently born in England. This is something that happens with a fair amount of frequency and wouldn’t be of much note except that the baby was born to Prince William Arthur Philip Louis, HG, KT, PC ADC(P), duke of Cambridge, presumably a future king of England (and yes, that whole thing is his name). I suppose it’s fine and reasonable for the British people, who for some reason enjoy being ruled, to celebrate the birth of a new person better than them, but for an American it’s unbecoming and should be discouraged. While the British monarchy is now mainly, though not wholly, a ceremonial link to a grand past and tradition, Americans should always remember that its very existence is antithetical to everything our great nation holds dear. This is part of why our forbears pulled off the greatest military upset since Salamis to stop having a king.

[C19fan]

Lighten Up Francis. Monarchy serves a purpose as a nonpartisan head of state. The office of the POTUS has degenerated into a type of elected monarch. We have our own aristocratic families in the Kennedys, Bushes and Clintons.

[Sirius Lee]

No different than any other celebritard.

[Tax-chick]

Bah. From an American point of view, the British royals are just a foreign celebrity family, and it’s perfectly nice to say, “Isn’t that darling!?” about their cute baby.

It’s elected “dynasties” and self-proclaimed “aristocracy,” at every level of government, that are the threat to republican government on this side of the Atlantic

[Salvavida]

Should have named the baby "Alfie."

That's one baby their Health Services won't touch.

[Fightin Whitey]

The Clintons are your idea of aristocrats?

What are Huma and Weiner? Peers of the Realm?

lol

[dfwgator]

The Clintons are your idea of aristocrats?

"It's a family act....."

[Fightin Whitey]

The Clintons are your idea of aristocrats?

What are Huma and Weiner? Peers of the Realm?

lol

[C19fan]

Chelsea did read up on Kate so she can be more “regal”.

[Vaquero]

Who gives a crap about British monarchy? I mean really.

The only entertainment value I get is watching people make idiots of themselves fawning over these ‘royals’

[Fightin Whitey]

Really? That’s pretty good.

I wonder if the poor dogface might have picked up a book on being a “beagle” by mistake?

[Da Coyote]

The royals may not be Mensa candidates (far far from it), but at least none to my knowledge have driven off of bridges with young women and hated women in general (a la Kennedys), just plain raped women and then slimed them (a la Clintons), lied about just about everything in their background in order to hide complete mental ineptness (a la Dorkbama), etc, etc.

And the Queen has class. The Hillabeast has...er....whatever.

I do not defend the royals, but they appear as a group to have a lot less feces coating them than do our elites of D.C.

[rjsimmon]

+1

You are on a roll today!!!

[Manly Warrior]

I suppose the brits need a good fairy tale to lighten up their subjective lives.

When the UK health care system decides to “terminate” life support on children who are perhaps gravely ill, when Muslim mobs and lone wolves terrorize the streets and when possession of a pointy knife let alone a firearm, when acting in self defence ( even “spelt” it in brit style), I guess looking at some inane hereditary view of royalty makes for an opiate of sorts.....
Now, on our side of the pond, our “royalty” can be traced back to mostly illicit and often violent means of wealth-building-and resultant political power; those families mentioned- akin to the murderings and menacings of the UK royals in times past- Thankfully we generally know what and who they are and time seems to sort them out.

[JoeFromSidney]

I rejoice that the happy couple had a healthy child. Let's keep the politics out of it.

[snoringbear]

“Lighten Up Francis. Monarchy serves a purpose as a nonpartisan head of state. The office of the POTUS has degenerated into a type of elected monarch. We have our own aristocratic families in the Kennedys, Bushes and Clintons.” Agree. If the Brits want their royalty so be it. It’s a relatively harmless indulgence and gives them a bit of fun in an otherwise dreary existence. Besides, this generation of royals seem to have their priorities pretty much correct, a bit to the left for me but whatever. And btw, the Royals pay their own way and are actually revenue generators for tourism. Let’em be and worry about the big stuff 😉

[Tax-chick]

Thank you. Can I trade in these points for something useful, like weedeater-repair?

[centurion316]

We don’t recognize bloodlines, but our aristocracy is just as insidious. You must be seated in the centers of power: Washington or New York with a few
Allowed to live in the “right” coastal cities. You must have an East Coast elite education and you must embrace progressive ideology. Decadence follows as a free benefit. Bloodlines produce some eccentricities and freedom of thought. This is not tolerated among the modern day annoited elitist crowd. We may call it a meritocracy, but it is far from it

[uncbob]

We have our own aristocratic families in the Kennedys, Bushes and Clintons.

And that is the problem

[uncbob]

Couldn’t have said it better

[rjsimmon]

Can I trade in these points for something useful, like weedeater-repair?

Wouldn't that be nice...