Should Great Britain abolish its monarchy?

  • News
  • Thread starter Shay10825
  • Start date
In summary: I really have to explain these?So when you hear Wales is part of England, you now know that it's not!In summary, the conversation discusses the topic of whether the monarchy in Great Britain should be abolished. Some people argue that it is a part of the country's history and should be kept as a figure-head, while others believe it is a waste of money and should be abolished. There are also differing opinions on the impact abolishing the monarchy would have on the government and society. Some argue that it would not make much of a difference, while others believe it would be a step towards a more just and equitable society. Additionally, there are discussions about the differences between England, Great Britain, the United Kingdom, and

Should the monarchy in Great Britain be abolished?

  • Yes

    Votes: 27 54.0%
  • No

    Votes: 23 46.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • #36
Indeed he does. It doesn't really jive so well with the rest of the student body, who hapens to be patriotic republicans.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
I think you do look like lindsay lohan. Wear something skanky and you are her. Do you know how many guys'd be checkin you? word.


I agree.

I've only been alive for the past 16 years, and geopolitics didn't really become interesting to me until relatively recently, gimme a bit of a break.

...you fight hard sometimes but when it is clear you have lost...you use your age?
 
  • #38
Age can be a valid excuse for losing and argument :-p
 
  • #39
British can keep them parasites(royalty), but why Canada or Australia still recognize Queen as their head of state is beyond me.
 
  • #40
stoned said:
British can keep them parasites(royalty), but why Canada or Australia still recognize Queen as their head of state is beyond me.

It's a good point. At least we make millions of pounds every year from Americans coming to look at Buckingham Palace. What benefits do citizens of Her Majesty's other states get from her?
 
  • #41
brewnog said:
What benefits do citizens of Her Majesty's other states get from her?

I think Canada prides itself of having Foreigner as a head of state,this way Canadians pretend to be different, more civilized than their American cousins.
 
  • #42
BobG said:
While it's somewhat outdated, the concept of the US is that I'm a Coloradan, while someone from Virginia is a Virginian, someone from Indiana is a ... uh ... Hoosier?, someone from Connecticut is a ... :rolleyes: ... :confused: .

lol, that was great. Your post motivated me to look up the list (I guess they're called "demonyms") and cast away the mystery that has plagued us all for so long.

The most comprehensive one I found is at the following link, along with demonyms for cities and other nations of the world.

http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1450700

The funniest one is "M*******," which is slang for someone from Massachusetts. It's not necessarily pejorative! [Edit: but the forum filter definitely thinks it is.]


And I want the UK's monarchy abolished if only for the simple joy of not having be exposed to it as the subject of tabloid news.

Oh yeah, and everyone from the UK is British. That's where the confusion about referring to the UK as Britain comes from.
 
Last edited:
  • #43
You would have thought that Canada would have seceeded (sp?) by now having its own government and all.
 
  • #44
If you ask two Canadians whether the Queen is queen of Canada, really, you will get three different answers.
 
  • #45
Three? What are they? I don't have any Canadians on hand to ask.
 
  • #46
Oh yeah, and it doesn't help that the UK lacks its own soccer team.

When we see "England" play "Germany" we think it's between two countries, and presume that you don't mind all being called "English." ;)
 
  • #47
Telos said:
Oh yeah, and it doesn't help that the UK lacks its own soccer team.

Soccer? Oh, you mean football!

Telos said:
When we see "England" play "Germany" we think it's between two countries, and presume that you don't mind all being called "English." ;)

A match between England and Germany is between two countries. Are you winding me up?

The people from England wouldn't mind being called English, but the people from Germany would probably prefer to be called German.
 
  • #48
brewnog said:
A match between England and Germany is between two countries.

So the UK isn't a country?

Oh wait... the UK is a "country of countries." Well, pardon me for being confused by that one!
 
  • #49
Telos said:
So the UK isn't a country?

Oh wait... the UK is a "country of countries." Well, pardon me for being confused by that one!

I just didn't understand why you were bringing Germany into it!
 
  • #50
brewnog said:
I just didn't understand why you were bringing Germany into it!

It was a poor example, or at least I wrote it very poorly. I apologize.

I did some more reading on the matter. I honestly didn't realize that England, Scotland, and Wales were also considered countries. I guess I have the lingering US mindset of e pluribus unum, that only one country makes a nation, and forgot that your nation was united under different circumstances.
 
Last edited:
  • #51
Telos said:
It was a poor example, or at least I wrote it very poorly. I apologize.

I did some more reading on the matter. I honestly didn't realize that England, Scotland, and Wales were also considered countries. I guess I have the lingering US mindset of e pluribus unum, that only one country makes a nation, and forgot that your nation was united under different circumstances.

Ah, but you forgot about the crown dependencies, the overseas territories, and Northern Ireland! :smile:
 
  • #52
brewnog said:
Ah, but you forgot about the crown dependencies, the overseas territories, and Northern Ireland! :smile:

Those are all considered countries in their own right as well? :confused:
 
  • #53
I don't think Wales is considered a country, although they have given it some limited home rule. It was conquered in the middle ages and since then has formed part of the country England. It is a principality, and Charles is its prince. What did you think "Prince of Wales" meant?
 
  • #54
selfAdjoint said:
What did you think "Prince of Wales" meant?

Absolutely nothing; a vacuous false-title of antiquated good-for-nothingness. Why else would we be having the discussion of abolishing a monarchy? It's not like it would be a "revolution."

Would it?
 
  • #55
Telos said:
It's not like it would be a "revolution."

Would it?
It damned sure would be if the Kennedy's from America worked up a militia and overthrew the crown, and claimed it for themselves.
 
  • #56
Telos said:
Absolutely nothing; a vacuous false-title of antiquated good-for-nothingness. Why else would we be having the discussion of abolishing a monarchy? It's not like it would be a "revolution."

Would it?


According to popular opinion here, no, as long as national income wasn't affected. The tories might have something to say about it, but I haven't met any here who are willing to voice an opinion.
 
  • #57
brewnog said:
According to popular opinion here, no, as long as national income wasn't affected. The tories might have something to say about it, but I haven't met any here who are willing to voice an opinion.

Wait a sec... the tories still exist? I remember hearing about them in history, but that is about it. Then again, I'm not up-to-date with my foreign affairs.
 
  • #58
motai said:
Wait a sec... the tories still exist? I remember hearing about them in history, but that is about it. Then again, I'm not up-to-date with my foreign affairs.

Urrrm, yes. They were in power until 1997... :smile:
 
  • #59
Isn't it funny that Great Britain is smaller than Britain (when using Britain to refer to the entire country)?
 
  • #60
Dissident Dan said:
Isn't it funny that Great Britain is smaller than Britain (when using Britain to refer to the entire country)?


No, because they're the same thing. Keep up! The 'Great' part is redundant in the English language, but the French still need its inclusion to distinguish it from Brittany (Bretagne).
 
  • #61
Ah, so Great Brittain is Grande Bretagne in French.

But doesn't that piss off the French people living in Bretagne?
 
  • #62
Telos said:
Ah, so Great Brittain is Grande Bretagne in French.

But doesn't that piss off the French people living in Bretagne?

Not comparing size of each Bretagne then it could be other way around, English could be pissed off that their country is called after French district Bretagne
 
  • #64
If anyone tried a military coup the Queen would order the worlds best and most powerful army in the world to crush you ****ers. The army swear legence to the Queen. The royal perogative gives her the legal right to rage any war without the say of the british people or parliament. What the rest of the world and most Britons don't realize is that the queen has control of the best armed forces in the world. Deep down everyone loves the royal family and what they stand for. Without them the world would be a very different place. America, Britain and the commonwealth owe a great deal to them, as our wealth would never have existed without them.
 
  • #65
The monarchy stays, simple as that. Brings in far too much money to get rid of them.
 
  • #66
Hey Andy, look! A new comrade!

Welcome crazy fairy!
 
  • #67
WTF? Crazy fairy?
 
  • #68
Britain is also often used when talking about the island of Great Britain.

The term "Britain" came from one of the inital inhabitants of the Island, and thus was coined to be used as the island...
England, Scotland and Wales. Wales is a principality. There are also Crown Dependencies and British Overseas Territories, but nobody wants to know about those, and nobody really knows where they all are anyway.
What about Scotland? Not only are we a Principality (edit: actually Scotland is a kingdom not a principality) but we have our own languages (like Wales but more of them) and we have our own parliament :-) And if SNP get in Power we will be a separate country again after 300 odd years of a union that has done the Scots more harm than good /rant

I voted No. The UK isn't a Republic and never will be, however we all know the Stewarts should be on the thrown ;-)

I do, however, tend to agree with Waste because the current family is actually of German descent.
True, but all the arostorcratcies in Europe are related.. The English are Anglo saxons after all..
 
Last edited:
  • #69
I don't think Wales is considered a country, although they have given it some limited home rule. It was conquered in the middle ages and since then has formed part of the country England. It is a principality, and Charles is its prince. What did you think "Prince of Wales" meant?

When the Stewarts were on the thrown of England and Scotland both countries were still countries in there own right, but shared a king.. Wales is a separate country in my opinion...

Isn't it funny that Great Britain is smaller than Britain (when using Britain to refer to the entire country)?

Britain isn't a country! Neither is Great Britain...
 
  • #70
If anyone tried a military coup the Queen would order the worlds best and most powerful army in the world to crush you ****ers. The army swear legence to the Queen. The royal perogative gives her the legal right to rage any war without the say of the british people or parliament. What the rest of the world and most Britons don't realize is that the queen has control of the best armed forces in the world. Deep down everyone loves the royal family and what they stand for. Without them the world would be a very different place. America, Britain and the commonwealth owe a great deal to them, as our wealth would never have existed without them.

Heh, and most of "her" Army is now Scottish not English (Well the best troops are : SAS) So the Queen better not deside to wage war up north again hehe
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
38
Views
11K
Replies
1
Views
540
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
16K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
1K
Replies
640
Views
70K
Back
Top