Chit Chat and All That...

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth of England has died.

 

Yeah!

Eli2 has left the chat.

Too much time being one of the most representative characters of that hideous, pathetic, outdated and revolting entity which is the mafia called Royalty.

Folklorists are going to mourn her passing now but from an ethical point of view it is a total WIN WIN.

 

As an American, I can't say that I fully understand the emotional significance of royalty, but I can respect it as a historically and culturally significant institution that provided a sense of identity, culture, tradition, and happiness for lots of people.

 

Just heard myself. Feeling unexpectedly sad.

 

Very well put. <3

 

As an American you should relate easier as your culture has had lots of personifications of what moral misery is.

Royalty is a middle age institution heritage financially supported by everyone's taxes, often involved in corruption scandals, proof that laws are not equal for everybody, perpetuating the unfair differences between social classes just for the sake of having born in one or other family.

Queen Elizabeth was openly in favor of the Nazi regime until her media assistants told her it wasn't positive for her public image to admit it. Just to mention one of the many dark and hideous chapters in Her Majesty's career. If you can assume that and consider it ok just because you enjoy living in a world where there still being kings, queens, princes and all that folkloric characters (sorry, no dragons), just support it yourself with your hard earned taxes and negotiate with it with your obviously absent sense of moral and historical knowledge.

 

Going way back into history, or maybe not at all, not sure. Being an Irish born American, truthfully was not too concerned about Kings, Queens, or what the hell they are. Eventually my interests were raised in the Royal Mafia. The English Royalty, they are well hidden rich people with the audacity to take from the poor and keep the wealth among their own. So what does it matter if it's one of the oldest surviving Royalties in the world. They raped countries, killed people only for control, then left it all in a wasteland. It's one of those, look at us, we are untouchable. It's time for this Royal circus to load up the clowns and disappear. Now England gets a new Queen, what's his name?

 

I can think about three really miserable institutions in the world. One of them is royalty. Young "modern" minded people tend to show indignation about the castes system in India and the injustices women have to face all around the world just for having been born as a female, then they support this heinous concept of royalty. Why? Just because of its superficial folkloric connotations? Then you've bitten the hook because that's the only reason they give to justify their existence opening a wider gap between social classes, leeching public wealth, acting like true mobsters and perpetuating an ignominy that in the case of the British crown has meant a comprehensive dismantling of cultures as the Nigerian, Australian, Indian, Irish... and the list goes on with endless genocides and crimes against humanity.

While you bend to kiss their feet to have the childish illusion of belonging to their part just for doing so, they are squeezing until the last drop of profits from the society and the community you belong to.

Human stupidity is endless and thanks to a majority lack of brains we all pay a very high price.

My only trace of sorrow about Lizzy's passing is that gunpowder hasn't been involved but aging instead.

 

I see a lot of posts online shaming her. This should’ve been more known to the public (me) beforehand. Let her rest lol.

Not that it changes anything.

 

I believe that there are two words to describe the English royalty.

Those two words: Gorilla capitalism.

 

There's a concept for those who seem blindfolded by kings and queens fairytales to visualize capitalism more clearly:

Infinite exploitation of planet earth resources in a finite sources planet earth.

So, thanks a lot to all those very responsible citizens who, beside multinationals corporations, are sending us straight to a hell on earth with each one of their decisions just because candies such as royalty are quite sweet and dreamy to them.

 

I’m not sure I follow. But what I can tell you though, is that American ancestral origin story was about fighting off the shackles of the monarchy.

Stability in leadership is tremendously valuable. Queen Elizabeth II delivered on that front for 70 years. Think about it, she weathered through a lot of historic events, basically the transformation of the world after WW2. She oversaw the dismantling of the British empire. I don’t know about you but that’s some serious devotion to a life of service and duty. Gotta respect it.

The British Monarchy which of course has seen centuries of bloodshed, should be criticized, but to level all this at the Queen is a bit over the top and unfair IMO.

It shouldn’t be surprising that a woman born in the 1920s has the sensibilities of a person born in the 1920s. I also think context is very important here. The picture of Elizabeth II throwing up Nazi salute signs (as an impressionable child no less) was taken in 1933, years before Hitler and the Nazis committed those atrocities. In 1933, Hitler was seen as a figure that saved Germany when they were suffering post WW1 and led Germany to rise in power, years before he would commit mass genocides and lead Europe into a devastating and deadly war. If this picture was say, taken during or after the war, then it would be a much bigger deal. And let’s also not skip over the fact that Queen Elizabeth served in the British army, during WW2, you know, against Hitler.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that nobody is perfect. For every bad you can say she did, I can also point out the good she did. She’s associated with over 600 charities in Britain and has helped raise almost $2 billion for these non-profits. The queen made it a special focus of her life to help reduce poverty. And to be honest with you, for a reign of 70 years, there does not seem to be as much controversies with Queen Elizabeth II like how you’re painting it as. She had a tremendous impact on many people’s lives and you can see it in the way people are mourning for her now. Your moral purity tests don’t do much for me if I’m being honest with you.

Sure, feel however you like about the Queen/Monarchy but there's no reason to ridicule other people's grief or expression of it. I can respect what she meant to a country. A manifestation of the ideals of a country. Someone who symbolically led a country through an incredible 70 years. Someone who made mistakes. Learned through them. Did it with dignity and respect.

 

This weird malice people have for her seems shallow at best. But you know how it is today, in an age of hot takes and instant gratification, being nuanced has become a lost art and shamed even. It takes a backseat to everything.

I’m personally not affected by her passing. Not much more needs to be said, really. Just showing some courtesy and respect. If there is a coronation though, I will likely be watching. It's something from a bygone age that nobody sees anymore and I also find the English coronation ceremonies to be pretty neat.

 

“William will also inherit the Duchy of Cornwall, an estate of 60,700 hectares (150,000 acres) spread across 20 counties, with a reported annual income of around £20m.”

Meanwhile most normal people are struggling to pay their bills. This doesn’t sit right with me at all. I think the royals are outdated and should be done away with, but I’m not happy to hear that she died. To be fair though, 96 is a good age.

If it was Prince Andrew, that would be a different story. There is a special place in hell for people who abuse children.

 

@ZFire

You put into words what I couldn’t be bothered to write. Thanks lol.

 

This thread got a little WARM!

 

Do you think the Queen’s passing will have any political implication on Scotland’s push for independence now?

 

An american ancestral origin you, and most USA citizens don't belong to.

In which active way has Elizabeth II delivered such an stability? Inaugurating sculptures and monuments? Sorry but I don't think cutting red ribbons with a pair of scissors is that difficult. What else? Posing for pictures? Giving pins to a queue of people she literally ignored who were most of them? A really curious way of delivering stability.

And yes, as anyone else being 96 year old, she has been in the world while many historical events took place, and?

When you're a queen or a king that "serious devotion", besides being unavoidable, is reaaally well paid, so we are not talking about a self sacrificing missionary who has lived with lepers just getting some food in return. And again, describe service and duty. Anyone can pose, sign documents and cut red ribbons, especially when you're being payed millions and living like a demigod.

Cookie crumbs to justify her status. Do you know British crown is one of the wealthiest ones in western culture? She had to justify her status somehow and she did it by literally giving alms to the poor. That's how rich people operate, they clean and justify their image by basically doing what you're supposed to do when you are revoltingly rich.

For the record: Queen Elizabeth II never did condemn Nazi atrocities in public. Never pronounced herself in her life regarding such events. Never.

Again, if you support royalty, at least be conscious of what it really is and means, don't be ashamed, look at yourself in the mirror and feel empowered, get rid of your complexes and admit you support a senseless chunk of folklore just for the sake of it. A chunk of folklore which not only doesn't benefit society but profoundly harms it. Overcome your identity crisis and admit it. I know it's not easy to recognize one is an old fashioned conservative in a world in urgent need of progression, but... it is what it is.

 

No, I don’t think many people (bar some rangers fans and those who have served in the forces) see the royal family as anything to do with Scotland. It’s Elizabeth ll, Queen of England.

I was not impressed when she spoke out just before the referendum vote saying it would be a shame if the nations were split up. Royals are not supposed to get involved with political matters. It was almost as bad as ‘the vow’.

 

See? I can also help you with words, mate.

 

Game. Set. Match.



Sorry... not good at lightening the mood. Lol.

 

Sure the witch complained.

Well, she won't anymore.

 

I still don’t get what it is you’re trying to say here. But you can just skip all that fluff and just say you hate everything the US stands for. Don’t worry, I won’t get offended. But @Wrfortiscue might, so you better watch out.

Through good leadership qualities, it resulted in 70 years of functioning society. That’s what stability looks like and it’s valuable. Not to you apparently, but for many, it is.

As the head of state and at the request of the UK Gov’t, she helped maintain good international relations with other countries (over 100 countries), playing a vital role in UK diplomacy for all those years. Humble, serious, she opened her mouth when needed, not to say stupid stuff. Basically, she was not like the 90% of politician leaders. If you don’t think that is duty and commitment to service, then I don’t know what to tell you. But I can already see this kind of stuff eludes your mind because you have very little understanding with how ‘realpolitik’ and geopolitics works.

I mean sure, duty and service were used for a lot of bad things, but I don’t think that applies here. I think the Queen left a respectable if not flawed legacy. Imagine trying to be perfect for 70 years...

I’m detecting a lot of edgelord energy here. I thought I had the world figured out too when I was an arrogant teenager, but overtime you’ll come to realize the simplistic ways of your thinking.

You should reflect on what has happened to the world post WW2. Her father was the emperor of India, let that sink in for bit. Then we have the decolonization of Africa and the emergence of two new superpowers into the world stage. The list goes on. Her ability to navigate and adapt through all that is nothing short of commendable. No other British monarch can be compared to this.

You must be one of those “silence is violence” folks we have wandering about in our current political landscape. It should be noted that the Queen had traditional values that she stuck with till the end, that meant no political and public discourse about controversial subjects. I mean, didn’t she also remain silent after Diana’s death too? You want to talk about consistency... well there it is.

Besides, any realist knows that actions speak louder than words.

Are you even British or at least part of the Commonwealth? I find it silly how you want to preach down on them especially regarding their identities and culture. And besides, last I recalled, England tried to do the whole republic thing in 1649, but that didn’t turn out too good, did it? I guess something must be working for them, to continue to remain as a constitutional monarchy... go figure.

Once again, your ‘holier than thou’ shtick and moral purity tests doesn’t impress me. You have no nuance in your thinking. It’s all binary with you. Has it ever occurred to you that one can criticize something while also wanting to see positive changes to it, while still also valuing it’s importance and significance? These things can co-exist together.

It’s pretty clear to me that you only engage in idealistic thinking and absolutes (ironic huh) and the raging hate boner you have for, be it royalty or capitalism, you offer no real or practical solutions/replacements for actual change. I have my issues with capitalism and letting it go unchecked is a huge problem, but unless you can find something to replace it successfully, on a wide scale, then it’s here to stay for now.

So you can spar me the useless nihilistic drivel, that humanity was mistake, it does nothing for me and it’s pretentious if I may say so. What I can tell you is meaningful change happens in increments, that’s just the way the world works, but you wouldn’t know that, would you? You lack nuance.

 

There's no need to be insulting, especially @Steph1710 of all people. Chill.

 

I was thinking along the lines of... if King Charles proves to be unpopular, then that would be the final irritation to push you guys towards independence. But I see your point.

 

I just don’t think many people up here really care much about it. I get the historical significance of figures like the Queen, but a lot of the monarchy’s history isn’t great. It’s like walking about Glasgow - beautiful, ornate, expensive buildings that have so much cultural significance - but a high number were funded by slavery.

Most of the people I know see leaving the EU/ the UK being run by either Tories or Labour as more of an issue. Both parties are practically dead north of the border.

 

NO, YOU'RE FLAGRANTLY WRONG.

A functioning society results from THE WORKERS, not from a social parasite.

I suppose you are ok with everyone having to pay their hard earned taxes for a family of leechers to exist, just for the sake of folklore but mate, trust me, being objective, that's a very, very sad position. May the RAT that has just died had donated half her wealth for tinnitus research we may be closer to a solution. Just to picture a very simplistic example.

And well, mate, I'm not going to bother reading the rest of your essay. I lack the motivation.

Cheers!

 

Damn @ZFire - you’re on, well, fire!

I’ve ignored his comments and blocked him. The guy’s a dunce.

@tpj - you're very sweet. Thank you.

Funny thing about all this is that I’ve never thought of myself as a royalist. I have no interest in the current royal family whatsoever. I was merely stating that the Queen had passed. Though, I have to admit, I did quite like the Queen.

However, @ZFire made some excellent points about her symbolic significance in a country deeply rooted in patriotism. BUT, I wholeheartedly agree with @makeyourownluck about their problematic history (though I wouldn’t apply that so much to the current royals - apart from that nonce Andrew.)

I do truly believe Elizabeth II was a kind and thoughtful woman. I don’t believe she has committed the atrocities that some conspiracists will have you believe. I was sadden at her death. May she rest in peace.

Also, I would like to mention to @ZFire how impressed I am with his knowledge of our British history. As a historian, of sorts, this brings me much joy.

 

This is obviously true too, but remember a functioning society needs to be preceded by legitimacy first and foremost, meaning there first needs to be popular acceptance of government or systems of governance. If the people don’t accept their government, then there can’t be order and stability for society.

Sorry, but this is an appeal to emotion. If you’re going to commit this fallacy, could you at least go more in depth. I feel like you’re not giving me the full picture here. Like how exactly does the royal family make their money? What does paying the royals cost the taxpayers (out of pocket) each year? How does the majority of the population feel about this? Does the monarch also pay taxes? I don’t want to do your research, but I have a feeling, if I look this up, it’s gonna make matters even more worse for you.

Edit: Okay I just did a quick google search and I found this:

Jesus christ bro, you are just making me respect the Queen more and more. Please stop!

Smart move honestly. But in the end: