Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

Identity

1
2
On 5 Jun 2012 at 8:28am Sceptic wrote:
On a previous post I mentioned that I believe the royal family gave this country an identity. Annette curtain-twitcher replied saying if the monarchy gave this country an identity how come the French, Germans, italians and the U S have strong national identities. You tell me ACT , but I can't see what that has to do with what I said. You can go into any pub and you will find someone who will tell you how to solve any problem this country faces and yet if it was that simple why don't they put themselves up for election. I will tell you why, because talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words.
3
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 8:43am Deelite wrote:
I think she meant that a country will have an identity irrespective of whether it has a monarchy.
Some might thank that the identity the Queens lends the UK us is not positive.. but a vestige and reminder of the loss of power, prestige and empire, the diminution of greatness. A country that lives in it's past and cannot let go or move on, a stark reminder of the social division and inequality manifest in the UK
2
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 9:03am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Thank you, Deelite. That is exactly what I meant. And I entirely agree with your 2nd paragraph, too.
 
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 11:50am teaboy wrote:
How do you put yourself up for election to the monarchy? I might be interested in standing.
1
1
On 5 Jun 2012 at 11:52am Sceptic wrote:
You have both prooved my point. And before you put pen to paper Deelittle check your spelling, I believe you meant think and not thank, it's mistakes like these if you was in a position of power that could cost lives.
 
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 12:00pm Sceptic wrote:
Hello Teaboy, now how do you put yourself up for election to the monarchy. Well being a Queen could help. Ha ha.
1
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 12:17pm Deelite wrote:
Septic.
Can you restate your point as it's passed me by.
BTW. It's not a spelling issue. It's a sight issue.
 
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 12:31pm Sceptic wrote:
Its Sceptic not Septic Deelittle, you should have gone to specsavers. Anyway no hard feelings and lets just agree to disagree. Have a good day.
1
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 12:36pm Clifford wrote:
Sceptic: 'You have both prooved my point. And before you put pen to paper Deelittle check your spelling...'
'Prooved'? It's that old law - if you correct someone else's spelling you;re bound to go on and make a mistake yourself. I've been caught on here a number of times doing that.
1
1
On 5 Jun 2012 at 12:47pm On another subject wrote:
On the subject of spelling.. do we really have to pull people up on their spelling mistakes at all? We all make them, some more than others but surely WHAT somebody is saying is more important than HOW they say it?
 
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 3:23pm Sceptic wrote:
Its strange how the original subject gets lost and is replaced by playground banter. You are right Clifford we are all guilty of spelling mistakes and I hold my hand up. The trouble is certain people get quite bitchy when they reply to a post and sometimes the only retort is correcting their spelling. Childish I know and I apologise. Must go as I am watching the jubilee celebrations on t/v and there must be something the royals are doing right to attract such an enormous crowd on rainy day.
 
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 10:24pm expat two wrote:
What the royals are doing right is convincing the commoners that they're relevant. Of course they've got the backing of the rich, the powerful and the influential - these are the people that like to think they too have a status the rest of us should defer to. Its got to the stage that some of their forelock-tuggers on this forum think the queen has a hard job, or (and I'm quoting directly here) "we've never had it so good" and other utter tosh. I don't understand it, its like there's some collective Stockholm Syndrome going on. Its like these people actually want someone to suck up to.
Its odd that all those people around the world that apparently love our queen and think its a wonderful, don't actually think its actually wonderful enough to have one themselves. Now why would that be?
Finally, a perspective from NZ - please rest assured there is nothing like the worldwide interest in the event that's getting reported. A few people talk about it, but then a few people talk about Katie Price's latest news. That's what this is, a tawdry celebrity event. Its a big crowd though, I'll grant you that. Nearly as big as turned up for the protest march against the Blair war.
1
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 10:24pm expat two wrote:
What the royals are doing right is convincing the commoners that they're relevant. Of course they've got the backing of the rich, the powerful and the influential - these are the people that like to think they too have a status the rest of us should defer to. Its got to the stage that some of their forelock-tuggers on this forum think the queen has a hard job, or (and I'm quoting directly here) "we've never had it so good" and other utter tosh. I don't understand it, its like there's some collective Stockholm Syndrome going on. Its like these people actually want someone to suck up to.
Its odd that all those people around the world that apparently love our queen and think its a wonderful, don't actually think its actually wonderful enough to have one themselves. Now why would that be?
Finally, a perspective from NZ - please rest assured there is nothing like the worldwide interest in the event that's getting reported. A few people talk about it, but then a few people talk about Katie Price's latest news. That's what this is, a tawdry celebrity event. Its a big crowd though, I'll grant you that. Nearly as big as turned up for the protest march against the Blair war.
1
1
On 5 Jun 2012 at 10:39pm Sceptic wrote:
You don't have to tell us twice to convince us you are right. I don't think anyone on the forum has suggested that the queen has a hard job, but what she has given up is her privacy and that can be quite a sacrifice as many a large lottery winner has found out. And in regards to the so called forelock tuggers, what a load of cr@p. You probably think its macho to be anti royal but like I said on the other thread, this country would be nothing without our monarchy. And in regards to the amount of people that turned up including our friends from overseas it was far more than the protesters march against the Blair war something that I disagreed with, but that was political and nothing to do with the monarchy.
 
 
On 5 Jun 2012 at 11:45pm Expat two wrote:
"This country would be nothing without our monarchy" Ha! England is nothing. It has a collapsing economy, It has falling standards of living, It has falling wages. The rich and poor are getting further apart, and the country's gdp is falling further behind others'. This is the saddest excuse for the whole sorry saga, its like you want to give your money to already extraordinarily wealthy people because you're scared other countries might not know who you are. That's not patriotism, that's an identity crisis.
In regards to the number that turned up, it is perfectly relevant. If a million plus protesters doesn't change your mind about an issue you disagree with, then nor is there any argument currency in a million plus who turn up to thank Brenda for the 60 years of 'hard work' the poor dear has had to endure, stoically collecting her civil list and being curtsied to. Maybe if I worked my fingers to the bone like that, I'd get a flotilla of fawning lackeys to say thank you too, but I doubt it.
And I don't for one moment buy your idea that her loss of privacy is a sacrifice - you really are clutching at straws now. I'd gladly make the same level of sacrifice for that sort of money.
I've got to leave it now I'm afraid, I've got to get on with some work, fortunately nothing so demanding as being fed cucumber sandwiches or watching gala performances from the best seats in the house. Phew, lucky lucky me.

 
1
On 6 Jun 2012 at 7:20am Sceptic wrote:
Expat two, you really do sound like an unhappy man. You say England is nothing and we have a collapsing economy, well we are not on our own in regards to the economy and again that has got nothing to do with the monarchy. If everyone in the country had an attitude like yours this country would be nothing. It's thanks to the people who turned up yesterday that makes this country great and they are not fore lock tuggers they are just People who are proud to be British. And if you think eating cucumber sandwiches and watching gala performances from the best seats in the house is what the rich do well let me tell you I was eating just as well at home and I bet my seat was more comfortable than the queens. Anyway cheer up and stop thinking of yourself as a commoner, you are just as good as they are. And in regards to the economy things will get better it just takes time. Now go into the kitchen and make yourself a cucumber sandwich and be pleased you are not living in the third world.
1
 
On 6 Jun 2012 at 9:47am brixtonbelle wrote:
Septic says "this country would be nothing without the monarchy", then two posts down he says the "collapsing economy ......has nothing to do with the monarchy". Seems tome you are a bit mixed in what you think the monarchy has done for the country - maybe you could expand ?

The Queen is a figurehead pure and simple. I have nothing against her personally, she seems a nice enough woman, but then again, so is my Mum (who is the same age) and she has worked bloody hard all her life too (from the age of 15). Maybe we can have a celebration of the people next year, to honour all the hard workers who have made this country the place it is today.

I think once Charles is on the throne, the monarchy will be finished. Let's have a scaled down version - much as they do in Netherlands. Get rid of the multiple hangers on and the ridiculous civil list.
 
1
On 6 Jun 2012 at 10:41am Sceptic wrote:
Have a go at me why don't you, that's the trouble with this country, too much whinging. Ok so your mum worked B@@@@y hard from the age of 15' well so did I and a lot of other people I know. Ok so you want a celebration of the people next year, well instead of whining on about it organise it it's not beyond the capability of man. But no it's easier to critise what I have to say. In regards to all the hard workers who have made this country what it is well I have been in industry all my life and there are quite a few who are not so hardworking as you think they are. I do agree with what you say about the hangers on in the monarchy well you get that in all walks of life. I hope you live long enough to see the collapse of the monarchy and perhaps you will eat your words.
 
 
On 7 Jun 2012 at 1:45am Expat two wrote:
You're a bit too keen at criticising others to complain about whingers Sceptic.
BTW, why do you call yourself 'Sceptic'? are you being ironic or sarcastic?
I'm not as unhappy as you appear to be yourself, I just don't understand why people dote on an irrelevant and obscenely expensive tax burden, and its usually the same people who complain about tax being spent on layabouts anyway.
 
 
On 7 Jun 2012 at 8:43am Sceptic wrote:
The layabouts ex pat do not attract tourism but like it or not the revenue that the royals create through tourism and also the business created by companies around the world as a result of the queens visit far outweigh the money spent on them. And by the way I am a very happy man and I apologise if I tend to crititice certain people but it's only a reaction to their replies. Anyway have a good day and I hope the weather brightens up.
 
 
On 7 Jun 2012 at 6:28pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
I don't get the supposed link between the monarchy and tourism. It's not as though tourism suffers in republics, is it? Tourists would still come to Britain for the history, heritage, culture and countryside if we were a republic, I'm sure.
On a lighter note, what would the country be called if it became a republic? The United Republics just sounds silly. The Republic of Great Britain sounds a bit Soviet. Maybe just Britain?
 
 
On 8 Jun 2012 at 3:59pm Sceptic wrote:
I'm really sorry Annette. I take it all back. You were clearly right.


15 posts left

Your response


You must now log in (or register) to post
Click here to add a link »
Smile
Smile Wink Sad Confused Kiss Favourite Fishing Devil Cool

terms


 

Vikings lewes 127:132
Vikings lewes

Ivermectin is just another flavour of snake oil, unless of course you are a horse with worms. more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
Believe you can or believe you can't... Either way you're right
Paul