Beefy's Corner - The Off-Topic Chat Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
ChilcoSaint said:
I favour the "man in the shack" approach to the question of having a head of state, or indeed any sort of leader at all. As Douglas Adams postulated, the only person capable of being entrusted with supreme political power is someone who has absolutely no desire for it. I have no idea how you would go about finding such a person, but it's got to be better than the shambles we have now.

On the question of the monarchy, as long as we have a class system where toffs who go to public schools are automatically groomed for power, either in Westminster or in the Civil Service, and we have a farcical political system which, to use the old phrase "whoever you vote for the government always wins", getting rid of the monarchy would be a waste of time. They are just a symbol of the rot that set in when Oliver Cromwell failed to set up a proper republic. I agree with TSS that their life of complete privilege and luxury is obscene, but if they were got rid of under the current system, they would be replaced by something possibly even worse, as political corruption and lust for power would be involved in selecting the head of state, which at least at the moment is now set out for the next three generations.
Click to expand...

I go back to my point of privilege. Would anyone here swap their lives for that of the newborn royal? Really? If we're loosely supporting the concept of freedom, that's the one thing this poor tyke will never know....
 
TheSecondStain said:
For pete's sake, I keep on about the system the Irish use. Read up.
Click to expand...

TheSecondStain said:
Joe. It doesn't bother me about the power or lack of power. An appointed ordinary person would do just as well. It's their position in society. It's the being waited on for their every need, that appals. Provided by the state, of course. There are people in this World who know nothing other than drudgery. This family know nothing other than luxury and it has never been been earned. Why do people simply overlook this obvious inequality..? Is it deliberate..?
Click to expand...

Would they? I'm not sure they would. The heir to the throne is essentially trained for the job from birth and, for me, that means they're likely to be better at it than anyone else. The symbolic President you advocate wouldn't have any real power so their main job would be to appear impartial and not say anything silly. Using the Irish President as an example, I can't see the Queen or Prince Charles saying anything as stupid as when Irish President Mary McAleese, after attending the ceremony to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, claimed Northern Irish children were taught to hate Catholics the way German children were taught to hate Jews by the Nazis. The Queen would never have said anything like that and while Prince Charles has expressed some unusual views on things like alternative medicine and architecture, when it comes to serious issues he shuts up because he knows not to get involved in that sort of thing.

As for equality, that really has nothing to do with monarchy. Japan, Sweden and Norway are generally seen as being among the most "equal" societies in the world and they're all constitutional monarchies while the US is one of the least equal.
 
Puck said:
Would they? I'm not sure they would. The heir to the throne is essentially trained for the job from birth and, for me, that means they're likely to be better at it than anyone else. The symbolic President you advocate wouldn't have any real power so their main job would be to appear impartial and not say anything silly. Using the Irish President as an example, I can't see the Queen or Prince Charles saying anything as stupid as when Irish President Mary McAleese, after attending the ceremony to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, claimed Northern Irish children were taught to hate Catholics the way German children were taught to hate Jews by the Nazis. The Queen would never have said anything like that and while Prince Charles has expressed some unusual views on things like alternative medicine and architecture, when it comes to serious issues he shuts up because he knows not to get involved in that sort of thing.

As for equality, that really has nothing to do with monarchy. Japan, Sweden and Norway are generally seen as being among the most "equal" societies in the world and they're all constitutional monarchies while the US is one of the least equal.
Click to expand...


Philip would mind you ;)
 
The whole Royal argument to me is a pointless one. Those against can't really offer or justify an alternative that would truly work in terms of financial impact (cost and revenue) and those in favour can't justify the luxury and privilege they are born into.

It's just an argument that neither side will ever step to the other side of the line.
 
fatletiss said:
The whole Royal argument to me is a pointless one. Those against can't really offer or justify an alternative that would truly work in terms of financial impact (cost and revenue) and those in favour can't justify the luxury and privilege they are born into.

It's just an argument that neither side will ever step to the other side of the line.
Click to expand...

Yep it's even more pointless then Pompey. :p
 
I'm not yet decided on whether Twitter has more bellends celebrating the Royal Baby... or posting on the #saintsfc hashtag.

Let's switch the internet and tv off for a few days please.
 
CBK said:
I'm not yet decided on whether Twitter has more bellends celebrating the Royal Baby... or posting on the #saintsfc hashtag.

Let's switch the internet and tv off for a few days please.
Click to expand...

Pleeeease! I work for an American company and I've had so many phone calls, emails and ****e about the new king, I started replying with "have we signed Banega then?"

Apparently their media have been wetting themselves as much as ours.
 
OK, well I'll agree to differ on the subject of the Royal Family. If anyone wants to talk about Star Trek episodes, I have been half-heartedly trying to introduce the subject. This evening, no doubt I'll select another before I hit the wooden hill. I'm on a bit of a roll, at the moment.

Did anyone else like the prequel series [Star Trek] Enterprise, by the way..? I really liked it from the start, yet I believe I'm in a tiny minority.
 
I thought out little monarchist/republican debate was relatively interesting and enlightening, but we can go back to telly if you like!?
 
TheSecondStain said:
OK, well I'll agree to differ on the subject of the Royal Family. If anyone wants to talk about Star Trek episodes, I have been half-heartedly trying to introduce the subject. This evening, no doubt I'll select another before I hit the wooden hill. I'm on a bit of a roll, at the moment.

Did anyone else like the prequel series [Star Trek] Enterprise, by the way..? I really liked it from the start, yet I believe I'm in a tiny minority.
Click to expand...

I loved Enterprise, but will never forgive them for killing Trip.
 
TheSecondStain said:
OK, well I'll agree to differ on the subject of the Royal Family. If anyone wants to talk about Star Trek episodes, I have been half-heartedly trying to introduce the subject. This evening, no doubt I'll select another before I hit the wooden hill. I'm on a bit of a roll, at the moment.

Did anyone else like the prequel series [Star Trek] Enterprise, by the way..? I really liked it from the start, yet I believe I'm in a tiny minority.
Click to expand...


To be honest I've be a sucker for all the star trek and Stargate series and movies! Hopefully they will produce a new series soon I really do find Scfi programs are sadly in the minority! :(
 
Downthe36 said:
I saw earlier that he made his professional football debut at a record breaking 13 years old........might not be quite so amazing now! :cheesy:

If it turns out to be true you'd think PSG are going to want some money back, trade descriptions!!!
Click to expand...

They'd need some mighty good lawyers to get back money that they never spent.
 
fatletiss said:
The whole Royal argument to me is a pointless one. Those against can't really offer or justify an alternative that would truly work in terms of financial impact (cost and revenue) and those in favour can't justify the luxury and privilege they are born into.

It's just an argument that neither side will ever step to the other side of the line.
Click to expand...

It's almost as if there are two sides to every coin! ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back