Poll: Do you like the British Royal Family?

[RyQ_TMC]

The moment England become the only truly civiliased country that still has a Royal Family.

Huh, way to show those backwards primitives in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands and Japan.

And, depending on your definition of "civilized", a number of other countries of which respect of human rights I'm not sure (or I'm sure myself, but it's debated, and so I won't bring them up), so I won't list them here.

Apologies if you're being facetious. Hard to tell on the Internet.

OT: I don't care about them as people (I don't know them, how would I form an opinion?), but the size of media circus around any big event concerning them is sickening. Government decisions really important for the future of my country were being made, but the media decided to ignore it in favour of breathlessly reporting on the Royal Baby's First Poop. I don't mind Commonwealth dwellers caring about the event, but in countries for which the events in the British Royal Family have ZERO relevance, I'd rather they focus on more important stuff.

 

[SonofaJohannes]

Non-brit here. They haven't done anything for me, so I don't care about them. It's the media I'm irritated at for giving them so much attention. But the family itself? Don't care. Sure they bring in money from tourists, but since I don't live there it doesn't really mean much to me.

You know which royal family I hate? Sweden's. Fuck those guys.

 

[spartandude]

while i dont dislike them personally(i dont know them) but the idea of a Monarchy just pisses me off, i also hate how we get right wingers in this country calling people scroungers when they need benefits to not starve because there are very few jobs but then praise the royal family, or how we dont have enough money to pay for doctors, nurses, teachers etc but had enough to pay for the wedding and jubilee on top of what they already get

I would also like to congratulate a good friend of mine on the birth of his daughter yesterday but i guess he isnt important because he wasnt born to the right people

 

[Dimitriov]

I voted Non British and Yes.

Though it's a little weird because, while I am not British, I am Canadian and they are my monarchy too. For Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders etc. to be lumped in with Americans, Germans, French, Japanese etc. seems kind of weird for this question.

 

[hawkeye52]

Nah, fucking leeches living off taxpayers. Can't believe the Brits are still putting up with them.

Yeah, how dare they generate four times their cost in land revenue for the UK (not even counting any tourism) and thus actually lowering the taxes for British citizens!

OT: I'm personally pretty indifferent but I like the idea of some sort of national mascot that's not a silly flag or fantastic creature.

You mean all that land that is practically the British governments under agreement after we fought a civil war against them because they were being pricks. If the nation just nationalised it as well we would see all of that revenue anyway. In fact even more so because we would develop it into something useful instead of being Prince Charlse's private hunting grounds.

On tourism. This has always been so silly of a subject to talk about purely because no one visits the UK purely just to see the royal family. Also, again, we could set up a museum in their favour at Buckingham palace and actually allow people to go in and explore to their fullest. London is still an awesome place to visit even after taking away the Royals and if people based their sole criteria on which city to visit based on whether they had a royal family or not then no one would visit Paris, Berlin, Milan, Venice or in fact most other EU cities that are extremely popular tourist destinations.

Anyway. They themselves are not bad. I bloody love Prince Phillip for all the racism that pours out of his mouth half the time. However they are a living anachronism from a time long gone. There is simply no purpose for them now since all of the jobs they handle could be done by anyone in parliament just the same. Also it would get rid of this faux power that people tend to believe in of the royal assent. It's a formality at best and is in fact handled almost exclusively by her privvy council and not herself because they can't afford to let some random person with a random set of beliefs block a democratic process.

 

[SillyBear]

I'm British and yes, I like the Royal Family and I am a monarchist.

 

[Vicarious Reality]

No, since i can not remember anything about them except the queens general appearance
Frankly i know almost nothing about my own King n Queen

I do like the idea of still having them but there is always the question of when people begin to like them a little too much

 

[Spineyguy]

This debate surfaces on a pretty regular basis in the UK, and there's been a lot of Royal stuff going on recently, so it's been fairly prominent.

I don't believe the Windsors do as much damage as people seem to think. Yes, they live off the taxpayer, but so do MPs, and all the thousands of unelected aids and advisors and associates to MPs that we never seem to complain about and who actually have a lot more influence in how our country is run. Incidentally, virtually all of these behind-the-scenes officials we never get to hear about are from well-to-do families and have either bought or humped their way into the houses of parliament, without any electoral input from the public. They seem like a much bigger issue as far as taking up taxpayers' money is concerned.

To me, the royal family seems like an entirely inappropriate thing to get angry about. I think the problem is partly that they seem quite rich, they own a few farms and stately homes and such, but this is a tiny fraction of those owned by some of the other, less high-profile aristocratic families we have. As far as the aristocracy goes, the royals are at the top in name only. Aside from anything else, most footballers are richer than the royal family, and people literally climb over each-other to throw their money at them.

One day I expect we will get rid of the monarchy, but the taxpayer will never feel the benefit, any money that was saved will, at best, go straight into the parliamentary budget, and at worst it'll fall into some bureaucrat's pockets. I'd much rather have some silly, doddery, inbred old royals than see some pencil-pushers get richer.

As always, Stephen fry says it better than I ever could.

 

[hawkeye52]

[snip]
Do you even know how the Monarchy works in modern UK?

Even though they have very little in the way of official powers, as that video (accurately) states, they still have influence. Why should they be treated any differently to other citizens? Equality is supposed to be an ideal to which this country aspires. Bleh, forget I said anything, this guy said pretty much everything I wanted to, but did so more concisely since he didn't get carried away like I did:

Unnecessary and at this point are nothing but celebrities. It's stupid how highly we value these people for nothing, seriously. We worship them for being born into a life of privilege.
British and no.

Well put sir.

[snip]
I can't speak for Great Britain, but here in Australia, the Crown's power to jump start a Royal Commission has been a godsend in fighting corruption and bureaucratic complacency. That and the Queen's veiled threats of dissolving parliament and sacking the PM; are very own 'Sword of Damocles' if you will, has proven instrumental in fighting corruption and preventing it from seeping into parliament in full form.

That and the idea that we could have a 'president' Gillard or similar character in the future with no higher executive power to answer to scares the shit out of me.

So if anything, I think highly of the monarchy. Not in the celebrity fashion, but rather as an institution of safeguarding the welfare of the populi.

But what gives the Queen (of England) the right to decide what's best for a supposedly democratic nation? If you have issues with corruption etc. then you need to excise it - not rely on an autocratic outside agency to save you. Depending on the Queen to do this might achieve the right end, but it's a poor means. Better to repair the system if it is truly broken.


Unrelated to last subject, to those who are so ready to applaud the "true cost of the royal family" video, it might be worth watching this:

So your issue is basically Boohoo life isn't fair?

No shit.

Yes fuck the poor people because lol life isn't fair. In fact that is what we should have said to the slaves of America or Jewish Germans circa 1940's.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

Mmmmm... A thread full of ignorance and tabloid spread hate... Gotta love the internet nowadays!

I am a fan of the Monarchy. From the money they bring into the country, to the pride I feel when I see them at events. They are the true figureheads of the nation... without them we would just have politicians, like most other countries! The US had George Bush for 8 years, whilst we had Queen Elizabeth II, a much more wholesome sovereignity.
Most of the Royal Family have jobs, and work, although they don't get directly paid for the jobs, they get paid separately... I love it when people point out that they are paid by taxes... guess what, as an Officer in the RAF, so am I! Got a bone to pick with that one too?
They are educated, and provide advice in their selected fields to a range of different disciplines. They also receive advice from specialists, and the Queen decides on direction to the government for what direction the country is to run... if they don't do it, she can dissolve them. This stops the government running amok, and turning into power crazed dictatorships like that of Zimbabwe or Somalia.
They draw loads of tourists to the UK, and help keep a sense of tradition and ceremony to our customs... Which helps make Britain humble and unique...

 

[Naeras]

Can the poll have a "who's the british royal family and where's the bacon?"-option? Because I don't know squat about them and couldn't care less.

 

[ForumSafari]

I don't have an opinion one way or another on monarchy as a system but I support the continued existence of the Royal Family for two reasons:

1. The Royal family own a large amount of land and assets in the UK, currently they make the country more than they take and if we abolished this system they would be free to take their toys with them. The unspoken assumption in a lot of Republicans is that the People's Republican Council Of Social Equality would seize their assets upon abolition, I consider this deeply immoral because generally you need a better reason to take things away from people than that you'd rather you had it than they had it.

2. The pseudo intellectual drivel and humorlesness of the Republicans on the Guardian and similar sites who mostly seem to hate the monarchy out of some notion that no one should have more in life than them and some kind of resentment that anyone should be considered 'better' than themselves. In addition there's a tendency to refer to the monarchy as foreign invaders in a way that wouldn't be tolerated if it was aimed at any other group, the idea of the descendents of immigrants forever being apart from the indigenous population would be called disgusting in any other case. Winding these people up and drinking their salty tears is wonderful.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

I'm British and whilst I don't care for the Royal family in general, I'm more than happy to pay my 50p tax a year for the endless amusement that comes from watching and listening to Prince Phillip.

 

[F'Angus]

I'm English and I quite like them, they're pretty harmless other than taking some money, but they pull in more money in tourism.

They give everybody in the country something to celebrate about, bringing us together. No harm in that, especially since the Politicians are such arseholes. They're historically important for making Britain what it is.

 

[Seventh Actuality]

I've nothing against them personally, but the fact that we still have a royal family is a fucking disgrace.

 

[EightGaugeHippo]

They not only dodge tax, they get paid to live here out of that money. Just because they are of a certain inbred lineage they are automatically more important than any one of us.

I could go in depth about all this, but sometimes I feel like slandering the monarchy will get me in trouble for no reason.

 

[Strazdas]

No. the fact that we still have monarchies (atrough with no real power) in 21st century is amusing at best and insulting at worst.

 

[Quaxar]

Nah, fucking leeches living off taxpayers. Can't believe the Brits are still putting up with them.

Yeah, how dare they generate four times their cost in land revenue for the UK (not even counting any tourism) and thus actually lowering the taxes for British citizens!

OT: I'm personally pretty indifferent but I like the idea of some sort of national mascot that's not a silly flag or fantastic creature.

You mean all that land that is practically the British governments under agreement after we fought a civil war against them because they were being pricks. If the nation just nationalised it as well we would see all of that revenue anyway. In fact even more so because we would develop it into something useful instead of being Prince Charlse's private hunting grounds.

No, I mean all the land that, while being publicly useable, is legally still Crown asset and thus private property of the Royal family.
Why don't we just take their land indeed? In fact, why don't we just take any kind of land that has a use? Guernsey has had it much too easy, relying on the UK for military protection but being an independent tax haven for rich people!

Oh, I know why we don't. Because this isn't a bloody dictatorship.

On tourism. This has always been so silly of a subject to talk about purely because no one visits the UK purely just to see the royal family. Also, again, we could set up a museum in their favour at Buckingham palace and actually allow people to go in and explore to their fullest. London is still an awesome place to visit even after taking away the Royals and if people based their sole criteria on which city to visit based on whether they had a royal family or not then no one would visit Paris, Berlin, Milan, Venice or in fact most other EU cities that are extremely popular tourist destinations.

It's a silly subject because it's hard to estimate in any case. Still, the royal wedding clearly brought a huge amount of tourist money specifically by being a royal event. Surely David Cameron's wedding wouldn't have brought a single extra person or quid to the city.

 

[Goldjit]

Where's the 'I don't care' option?

 

[lunam-kardas]

I'm rather indifferent towards them. The only time they even made a blip on my radar was when everyone around me started making fun of all the silly hats at the royal wedding.

Those hats were indeed silly.