Royalty

Started by Jolene November 6th, 2010 5:03 PM
  • 1158 views
  • 19 replies

Jolene

Your huckleberry friend

Age 27
Female
Seen September 25th, 2012
Posted September 25th, 2012
1,287 posts
13.8 Years
What are your thoughts on royalty?

Do you live in a country which has a monarchy? Do you think it is a good thing or bad? On one hand they do a lot of charity work but on the other hand their lifestyles are paid for by taxes which could go to other things. Hmm.

Do you wish your country had a monarchy?

Also do you think that royal families should be more accessible to ordinary people? I know that people in the royal family normally only marry other people in the royal family which means that most people will never even get a chance to be in the royal family.

I think they should make royal families more accessible. I think that there should be opportunities for ordinary people to become members of the royal family based on merit for doing royalish things like giving lots of money to charity. Or maybe there should be an annual televised talent show where people compete to be in America's first royal family, or in countries that already have royalty they will be competing to be the newest royal family member. It will be called Princess Idol and contestants will compete by doing royalish things like trying to open the most amount of shopping centers within a set time limit, or coming up with a scheme to raise the most amount of charity money.

I dunno I'm just throwing ideas out there and now it's your turn.

What light through yonder window breaks?
It is the East, and Joliet is the sun!

Lunacy Giat

Archaeologist+Pokemon=Awe some?

Male
Seen May 9th, 2011
Posted May 7th, 2011
44 posts
12.6 Years
Most royal family members marry other royals in order to promote cohesion between the two groups. For instance, two countries each with a monarchy will have their children marry in order to exemplify their willingness to work together.

Would I personally like a monarchy? No, I'd prefer anarchy. Why? Nobody can ever be trusted to decide what is good for you, or speak for you, besides yourself.

As to address your third statement about adding new members to the royal family, it wouldn't work. A meritocracy and a monarchy can never coincide, unless it's a situation similar to the UK. Where the queen is a simply a figurehead and can "knight" those that have done something admirable. Those who are knighted have no political power, and is just another title you can throw onto your name. Kind of like a PH.D. or an M.D. with less work.

Although, I've never lived in a country that is ruled by a monarchy so I'm taking this viewpoint from someone outside of that culture, and may have different opinions to those who live within a country controlled by a monarchy.

Friend Code Pearl: 0861 7514 5561
Friend Code SS: 0432 2546 6040
Friend Code Black: 5243 1245 1303

Roxichu

Blastoff at the Speed of Light

Female
Team Rocket HQ
Seen February 28th, 2011
Posted February 1st, 2011
100 posts
12.7 Years
I personally think monarchy is superior to democracy AKA mob rule.

One only needs to look at the US's labyrinthine political system, with it's endless election frenzies, bickering political parties, lobbying, pandering, special interest groups, and houses and senates and sub-governments slowing any real progress down...should tell you all you need to know.

Monarchy has been the normal system of human government for all but the last few hundred years of history, in most cultures around the world. Even remote Amazonian tribes have a Chief to rule them.

A single hereditary ruler seems to be the natural way for humans to govern themselves.

In recent years, we've seen first world countries attempt to force democracy on places that have never known it, and frankly don't seem to want it (see: Iraq). It's awfully ethnocentric to assume that we have the superior system of government and everyone else needs to conform to our ways, no?

インフェルノの津波

Seriously?

Male
Seattle
Seen March 28th, 2020
Posted June 8th, 2014
3,899 posts
13.4 Years
Well I'm obviously of royalty, of course. I am apart of the Smug Family.

Beyond that it would be absolutely dreadful if commoners like yourselves knew more about or or our lives.

Also you have no idea what being of royalty even means. I'm talking about the "queen" of England. I'm talking about African Kingdoms. Monarchy exists there alright, and from what I've heard they're doing good at it.

About your questions...Monarchy is the only way to go. Look at democracy. And the republic! Outrageous. If it wasn't for monarchy, most of you would be either in tears, broke, or dead.

And the reason we spend so much is...classified.

Any who, good-bye!

This post has been approved by the Prince of the Smug Kingdom. Please send all your money to his bank.
Age 27
Male
Seen March 6th, 2013
Posted May 22nd, 2012
635 posts
14.9 Years
The British Royal family do absolutely nothing but sponge off of the the rest of the country. Democracy is nowhere near perfect but it's definitely better than having the kind of hereditary monarchy that allows complete idiots to take charge of a country.

Luckily, they are powerless, but that doesn't explain why they still get so much money for doing nothing (or in Prince Charles case, be racist to people). I've got an idea for them: Get their fat butt's down to the job centre.


"Lightning. It flashes bright, then fades away.
It can't protect. It only destroys."
Holy Roman Empire
Seen February 23rd, 2016
Posted February 23rd, 2016
2,551 posts
13.7 Years
Monarchy in its modern form is a pure waste of money, while in its old form its leads to a higher percentage of crazy rulers than most other forms of government do, because of the inbreeding and people not really able to do anything (other than revolt). Sure, in a democracy, just as bad or worse things can happen if the people are just frustrated and/or deceived enough to elect bad, bad politicians. Conclusion: Churchill was right.

twocows

The not-so-black cat of ill omen

Age 32
Male
Michigan
Seen February 19th, 2023
Posted April 30th, 2021
4,307 posts
14.2 Years
I personally think monarchy is superior to democracy AKA mob rule.

One only needs to look at the US's labyrinthine political system, with it's endless election frenzies, bickering political parties, lobbying, pandering, special interest groups, and houses and senates and sub-governments slowing any real progress down...should tell you all you need to know.

Monarchy has been the normal system of human government for all but the last few hundred years of history, in most cultures around the world. Even remote Amazonian tribes have a Chief to rule them.

A single hereditary ruler seems to be the natural way for humans to govern themselves.

In recent years, we've seen first world countries attempt to force democracy on places that have never known it, and frankly don't seem to want it (see: Iraq). It's awfully ethnocentric to assume that we have the superior system of government and everyone else needs to conform to our ways, no?
Yes, because rule by one person or family has worked out so well in the past, hasn't it? In fact, it still works to this day! I, for one, am glad that the countries on the top of this list are not democratic at all, because certainly then they would be horrible places to live. Oh, wait, they are democracies. Oops.

We may not live in a perfect world, but it's certainly much better than what we've had in the past. At least a majority of the world isn't raping and/or killing each other. And that's due in large part to rule by the people.
VNs are superior to anime, don't @ me

Livewire

Male
Sunnyshore City
Seen December 3rd, 2022
Posted August 2nd, 2019
14,091 posts
13.8 Years
To quote the Patriot:

"Why should I trade 1 Tyrant, 3000 miles away, for 3000 tyrants 1 mile away?"


Any form of Government can suck, whether it be a Monarchy, Republic, what have you. Monarchy was the standard governmental system for thousands of years, but we're in the 21st century. Absolutist Monarchies are soooo 18th century.

And the people against the monarchy, are more against the Absolutism that those monarchs ruled by, rather than the actual Monarchy. The current Monarchy in England, while being a figurehead, is still a symbol of British pride and heritage. Princess Diana was a hero to many people before she died, and Prince William and Harry continue her legacy.

Rich Boy Rob

"Fezzes are cool." The Doctor

Age 29
Male
Seen March 15th, 2016
Posted August 15th, 2015
1,051 posts
14.9 Years
I personally like the idea of a monarchy. While in the past they may have become corrupt, but that is usually due to having absolute power over the law. I think our royal family should actually have a bit more power than to simply knight people though.

As for being able to "apply" (for lack of a better word) to be royal, then that completely throws the idea of a hereditary monarchy out of the window. To be in the royal family you need to be either of royal blood or marry into the family. Of course you could always start a revolution and declare yourself King/Queen instead, Fable III style.
In my pants!

Age 35
Male
Pennsylvania
Seen August 14th, 2012
Posted March 29th, 2012
954 posts
16.4 Years
I personally like the idea of a monarchy. While in the past they may have become corrupt, but that is usually due to having absolute power over the law. I think our royal family should actually have a bit more power than to simply knight people though.

As for being able to "apply" (for lack of a better word) to be royal, then that completely throws the idea of a hereditary monarchy out of the window. To be in the royal family you need to be either of royal blood or marry into the family. Of course you could always start a revolution and declare yourself King/Queen instead, Fable III style.
I actually couldn't disagree more. I think royalty is a waste of time and money. It might be my socialist side coming out, but I find is slightly offensive that someone, just because of their "blood", can be considered more important (or more powerful) than everyone else. I just don't think it should work that way, ever.
Exterminate All Rational Thought

Richard
0215 9525 7958

slls81

What does that even mean?

Male
probably in the RP section
Seen July 1st, 2020
Posted January 8th, 2012
1,512 posts
14.5 Years
The British Royal family do absolutely nothing but sponge off of the the rest of the country. Democracy is nowhere near perfect but it's definitely better than having the kind of hereditary monarchy that allows complete idiots to take charge of a country.

Luckily, they are powerless, but that doesn't explain why they still get so much money for doing nothing (or in Prince Charles case, be racist to people). I've got an idea for them: Get their fat butt's down to the job centre.
I can see what you're saying, but you give the Royal Family a bad rap here. They represent a HUGE part of our cultural history... and let's face it, in terms of tourism that's where the UK make their money. The Royal Family open up all of their houses/castles to the public at various points in the year, which are major tourist attractions for the UK. Let's be honest, people aren't coming for the weather.

Whenever the Queen heads to somewhere that used to be in the Commonwealth (USA, Australia etc.), she receives a better reception than any British political figure, even Cameron receive. Everybody wants to be seen with her, and every TV station wants a picture of her. In terms of relations with other countries, she definitely plays a role.

The Royal Family also represent the country's defence against unjust laws.Of course it would only apply in extreme circumstances, as the country would revolt if the monarchy looked like it was trying to take back power. A situation that would apply id if someone tried to take control of the UK under a Dictatorship. How did Hitler take power? He got majority vote, and used it to pass a law making him ruler. As the highest power in the land, no-one could overturn it. In Britain, someone tries that, the monarchy overturns it... no longer a law. It's a nice back up to have, just in case.

So yeah, I do think the Royal Family contribute to Britain. That's not even to mention the millions and millions of pounds they donate and raise for charity every year. So as far as 'getting down the job centre', they contribute far more to the countries economy that 90% of people... so just no.

note - I am not in favour of giving the monarchy back power of the country, I just feel they play a far more important role in the UK than Blue Nocturne gave them credit for.

Rich Boy Rob

"Fezzes are cool." The Doctor

Age 29
Male
Seen March 15th, 2016
Posted August 15th, 2015
1,051 posts
14.9 Years
I can see what you're saying, but you give the Royal Family a bad rap here. They represent a HUGE part of our cultural history... and let's face it, in terms of tourism that's where the UK make their money. The Royal Family open up all of their houses/castles to the public at various points in the year, which are major tourist attractions for the UK. Let's be honest, people aren't coming for the weather.

Whenever the Queen heads to somewhere that used to be in the Commonwealth (USA, Australia etc.), she receives a better reception than any British political figure, even Cameron receive. Everybody wants to be seen with her, and every TV station wants a picture of her. In terms of relations with other countries, she definitely plays a role.
I couldn't agree more. I mean what does, say, America that gets the same reverence as the Royal Family? The President? I don't think so, really. Besides, patriotism in America actually seems to be directed towards their flag weirdly, seeing as they go crazy whenever it get's burnt or defaced.
In my pants!

Ivysaur

Grass dinosaur extraordinaire

Age 32
He/him
Madrid, Europe
Seen 1 Day Ago
Posted April 5th, 2023
21,076 posts
16.2 Years
In my country, Spain, we have a Decorative Monarchy, so I'd happily buy a Republic.

Our King is nominally the Chief of the State and Commander in Chief of the Army, but our President effectively holds all the political power a regular Chief of State has, and the Minister of Defence effectively works as the highest authority of the army... so the King's only work is signing all the decisions taken by the Government and all the laws passed by the Parliament, a job that anybody else could do the same exact way he does.

You can say tradiotion, you can say he is a respected figure that represents the country, but... an elected President works that way too. And you take away the little fact that that guy has special rights the other citizens don't have just for being son of his dad. Completely defeats the idea of democracy.
Age 32
Female
Destiny Islands; waiting for you
Seen May 29th, 2012
Posted August 31st, 2011
2,242 posts
18.7 Years
I think Royalty is good at some point but I don't like the fact that the prince/princess have a birthright to the throe. What if the king(their father) is horrible &the prince/princess is jusr like him? The people would ger no choice.
:cer_love:PC Family::pink_love:
PairsDad UncleBig Sister Little Sisters
NephewBig Brother Panhead little sister
Chaos bringing little brotherFun little brother

"For Neptune." </3

Lunacy Giat

Archaeologist+Pokemon=Awe some?

Male
Seen May 9th, 2011
Posted May 7th, 2011
44 posts
12.6 Years
I couldn't agree more. I mean what does, say, America that gets the same reverence as the Royal Family? The President? I don't think so, really. Besides, patriotism in America actually seems to be directed towards their flag weirdly, seeing as they go crazy whenever it get's burnt or defaced.
You could definitely define American royalty as being the media, and the various "Hollywood" folk that a large percentage of this country, and the world for that matter, constantly worship. Early in our countries history, those in the south wanted to maintain a formal "titled nobility". Their idea was shot down, but lived on through informal "nobilities", such as plantation owners and those that were highly affluent within the community.
Friend Code Pearl: 0861 7514 5561
Friend Code SS: 0432 2546 6040
Friend Code Black: 5243 1245 1303

Esper

California
Seen June 30th, 2018
Posted June 30th, 2018
I'm fine with royals if they use their fame and money for good causes like Princess Diana did. Otherwise, what's the point of them?

I don't think it needs saying (well, maybe it does, who knows?), but royalty actually running countries and having power is so backwards it would be hilarious if it wasn't so unfortunate. And it really is unfortunate since countries with kings/dictators (I'm making a judgment here) with real power are often some of the worst places in the modern world for people to live. Nobody should have automatic rights to so much power. It causes problems.
Age 34
Female
Canada
Seen June 1st, 2018
Posted January 20th, 2012
272 posts
12.7 Years
Meh, I dunno. I don't have royalty where I live, but yeah, if they use their money for good like Diana, then that's okay.

It really doesn't bother me though. Alot of royalty in countries doesn't rule, like England and Japan. They have nothing to do with politics, the presidents and prime ministers do. So yeah, meh.


Currently playing:
Xenoblade Chronicles
Persona 4: The Golden