The Queen is in hospital

Whether you like or loathe the Royal Family, the Queen has shown a dedication to duty that some of the younger members would do well to emulate. She is 95 and recently widowed and if that wasn't enough to be going on with she has the stress of Andrew and Harry to contend with. She is not just our Queen but a Mum and Granny too. I feel for her and respect her for the wonderful job she has done for our country.

It’s in very poor taste though on a thread which is about the Queen being admitted to hospital to post your thoughts about why there shouldn’t be a monarchy Grany. I’m not a fanatical Royalist by any stretch of the imagination but this wasn’t a general thread about royalty where it would be appropriate. Bad call.

Tugger, not tigger!
?

vegansrock

I agree with Grany but you’ll find the forelock tuggers cling to the idea that the RF are wonderful and hard working etc when they actually do very little that isn’t orchestrated for them. I don’t have any personal feelings about them as people, the Queen’s main claim to wonderfulness is existing for so long, which she’s managed to do. Their main function is to pose for photos for us to gawp at, which they do ok .

I'm no forelock tigger vegansrock, but I object to a political pressure group using Gransnet as a platform for its propaganda.

You yourself state your views on veganism but I respect the way you do that because I can see that they are your views and you are not a representative of any political pressure group using Gransnet.

I'm a pragmatic Royalist, I like stability and continuity, but if the RF don't want to continue with the burden of the role of Head of State any more or a referendum was in favour of becoming a republic then fair enough.

Do some not use ‘love’ when speaking of people we have never met ?

I do, said to my elder daughter yesterday ‘I love Fats Domino’

Franbern there are many more forms of love than those you mention.
'Love' is a very large emotion/concept.

Alegrias1

Anybody can love anybody they like.

"Loving" someone we've never met, spent time with and don't really know is sentimental and minimises the feelings of the people who really do love her.

IMO.

Totally agree.
I LOVE my children, my grandchildren.
I am fond of some of my friends and extrended family
I like other people whom I know.

We may have feelings regarding the idea of a non-elected Head of State, For or Against - or not care one way or the other.

But Love.......and old woman,whom we have never met or had any personal involvement with???? Come on!!!!

Callistemon

Grany we know you are the face of Republic on Gransnet but Republic does have its own website which people can access if they wish to read the propaganda.

I do not think that Gransnet is the place to constantly post political propaganda.

Posting political views is one think but this is a pressure group and not the personal views of a Gransnetter sharing with others.

These are my views written by me.

Republic is not a pressure group it's a campaign group it's not propaganda it's real facts well written and properly researched. You will get propaganda about the Royals but not from Republic.

Thank you vegansrock I also don't have any feelings about them as people it's the institution they belong to.

Will people care as much about Charles to be a king well the way he runs the Duchy and lobbies ministers for his own particular interests when a Head of State is supposed to be above politics is open to question.

Talking about our future Head of State and wether there could one day be a choice the people can make is a very good political subject to put on the politics thread on Gransnet.

Glad there are now many more younger people questioning the monarchy and wanting to choose an Elected Head of State

I agree with Grany but you’ll find the forelock tuggers cling to the idea that the RF are wonderful and hard working etc when they actually do very little that isn’t orchestrated for them. I don’t have any personal feelings about them as people, the Queen’s main claim to wonderfulness is existing for so long, which she’s managed to do. Their main function is to pose for photos for us to gawp at, which they do ok .

Grany we know you are the face of Republic on Gransnet but Republic does have its own website which people can access if they wish to read the propaganda.

I do not think that Gransnet is the place to constantly post political propaganda.

Posting political views is one think but this is a pressure group and not the personal views of a Gransnetter sharing with others.

In terms of employment the RF is like a factory , providing jobs country wide. It isn’t a one way street, folks are employed — not unpaid skivvies.

Well said Casdon.
Not the right thread. Grany, I hope if you’re ever sick, your acquaintances don’t drag up everything they think is wrong with how you live your life.

This thread is not the place Grany.

What about an Elected Head of State

I get how monarchists are persuaded to agree with a monarchy. There is lots of PR and coverage of the RF photos taken on their walk abouts, which they call work. But what about the reality the concept of being a royal, really being considered. Take the fact we have a hereditary royal family born to rule. None have been elected, a child born today cannot one day aspire to become Head of State of their own country. How did Kings Queen's start to rule it was a fight and the winner became king or queen to rule over everyone.

Queen of UK did not want ethnic people in the palace in the 70s she asked to be exempt from race discrimination laws, which still stand. At that time she also had a transparency law changed to hide her embarrassing wealth from the public. The Royals made considerable amounts of money from the slave trade that money passed down from monarchs to the queen who does not pay hereditary tax. Did not pay tax until 90s voluntarily. There has never been any apology about the slave trade from the queen. Then people say she doesn't interfere in politics but there is queen's consent she has a say on laws that effect her private interests!

Monarchy is secretive more secretive than the secret services. RF are free from freedom of information laws, shouldn't our Head of State be accountable to the public? The monarchy is corrupt, it is state sponsored corruption.

Think, you're born you will be queen where a crown live in palaces, castles, large houses with many acres of land wear jewels, fine clothes, have servants to cater for you and your future family with best food, top chefs,, travel to many foreign lands by private jet, your yacht, helicopters and train. You will have secretaries to plan your day you will have dressers. Nice job.
Many People relying on food banks.

So people are led to think wow we got a queen aren't we lucky let's bow and scrap to our betters. . But what does this family do why do they live a life of luxury. Why do we have them. They really do not work hard they hardly work at all.

RF are extremely rich and get lots more money thrown at them all the time. And spend public money daily.
Australian government do not want to foot the bill for P Ann's planned visit to their country.

A written constitution so we know what our country stand for.
Isn't it time we have an elected Head of State to represent us the people.
Having a queen stops proper democracy and reform of the House of Lords.
Queen was powerless when Johnson pirogued parliment it was up to a judge to say Johnson lied.
Queen has no checks on government, its been in a state for a good while, she can only do what PM asks so, what is the point of monarchy.

Barbados now has its own Democratically Elected Head of State. Well done Barbados.

The commonwealth is 90% republic they should ditch the Royals who are only hanging onto it to give them some credence, and tourism no proof, people come here to see our country buildings history not Royals, The Palace of Versailles has many more visitors.

"Nobility is not noble...Shatter the romance that keeps a nation numb and spellbound whilst privilege picks its pocket"

Bridgeit

JaneJudge , your written implication was that PC had his very own Real ToyTown Village to play with.
When in reality it is a forwards thinking additional way of working & living.

No I didn't and as I said in my following post I felt it was based on the philosophy of Ebeneezer Howard. Lots of old money philanthropists rent out their villages to normal folk anyway, as you'll know as the expert on the subject. Do I feel sorry for them? no, I don't.

Just a footnote to my comments about George 111rd. I was on!y pointing out that this elderly incapacitated King was the monarch till the day he died. George 1Vth was Prince Regent officially standing in on every level for his father , but he was not actually king until 29th January 1820. I believe the Queen and Charles will do the same if needed.

I think you’re right Annie, I don’t think we could bypass Charles when the time comes. There is no precedent in this country for that to happen. I do think William will be a very good king, he’s well liked by the people and Catherine is liked too.

Thank you Maddyone and apologies.

I don’t think the Queen should abdicate, she will have full knowledge of her uncle’s abdication and the harm that caused,
she wouldn’t want to put the country into that turmoil .

I believe this and the fact she made a vow in the Abby will cause her to remain Monarch until her death.

Charles has a position as Prince of Wales, and he honours this.

Some want to bypass Charles and William take the throne,
ridiculous, when has a Prince of Wales been the father of the
Monarch ?

Yes, that’s an interesting way of looking at it Riverwalk. I don’t know if ‘stepping back’ would cause a wobble, probably because apart from Edward VIII it’s never happened before in this country. Obviously that was quite a scandal in its day, and the royal family never forgave him for it. That probably informs the Queen’s views somewhat.

No problem Bridgeit.

maddyone

Perhaps we should get back to the thread. The Queen is very old. She appears to be in robust health mentally, but she’s had a wobble physically. We don’t know what was the matter because we weren’t told. Some of us, myself included, think perhaps it’s time she stepped back, but nonetheless we realise she won’t, others think she’s good to go for a few more years. Does that about sum it up?

Yep, that about sums it up maddyone

As said earlier, I'm not a monarchist - maybe that gives me a more detached view!

If a monarch abdicates, steps back or whatever to make way for a son who's now old himself, do you not think that weakens the whole set-up. Surely the strength in the UK monarchy is in the certainty?

The Queen could easily live another five years and might outlive Charles, who knows. The whole thing is absurd anyway but it is so far firmly embedded.

I'm surprised that some monarchists seem to approve of a 'let him have a go at it' approach - then you're at the mercy of current trends, rather than sticking with the status quo.

I agree Maddyone , you have summed it up very clearly.
Apologies for being one who went off track ?

JaneJudge , your written implication was that PC had his very own Real ToyTown Village to play with.
When in reality it is a forwards thinking additional way of working & living.

Perhaps we should get back to the thread. The Queen is very old. She appears to be in robust health mentally, but she’s had a wobble physically. We don’t know what was the matter because we weren’t told. Some of us, myself included, think perhaps it’s time she stepped back, but nonetheless we realise she won’t, others think she’s good to go for a few more years. Does that about sum it up?

And as for “snipey comments”. Annie you made a pretty bad one earlier which was deleted.